Open Stack

On 06/18/2013 04:59 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote:
> The issue here is not really the burden of maintaining an alternate
> testing method in the tree... it's that by default newcomers use the
> alternate method rather than the one used by our CI infrastructure,
> which should be their default choice.
> 
> Personally I would introduce a TESTING file that would describe all
> available methods for running tests, and rename/move run_tests.sh to
> something less discoverable... so that people looking for ways to run
> tests would find TESTING first.

+1

As a developer newly assigned to keystone work I will echo the value of
both the run_tests.sh script because of it's obvious presence and
utility. A TESTING file should be mandatory as well. I immediately found
the run_tests.sh script but fumbled around for a while until I found all
the information I needed to run the tests (despite already being
familiar with nose). It also took me a while to figure out how to run an
individual test (mostly because I assumed one had to include the tests
directory in either a test pathname or module path) but run_tests.sh
apparently points nose into the test directory. Had there been a TESTING
readme file it would have definitely saved me time and frustration.

I had to learn about tox after a suggestion in IRC.

Coming from a distro perspective I prefer not to see non-distro items
being installed (venv has worked well though). And I definitely like
being able to drop into the debugger, nose has served me well in the
past and I like it.

John