Open Stack

Excerpts from Kevin L. Mitchell's message of 2015-04-28 08:15:51 -0700:
> On Mon, 2015-04-27 at 15:54 -0700, Clint Byrum wrote:
> > Excerpts from Kevin L. Mitchell's message of 2015-04-27 15:38:25 -0700:
> > > On Mon, 2015-04-27 at 21:42 +0000, Jeremy Stanley wrote:
> > > > I consider it an unfortunate oversight that those files weren't
> > > > deleted a very, very long time ago.
> > > 
> > > Unfortunately, there's one problem with that: you can't tell tox to use
> > > a virtualenv that you've built.  We need this capability at present, so
> > > we have to run tests using run_tests.sh instead of tox :(  I have an
> > > issue open on tox to address this need, but haven't seen any movement on
> > > that; so until then, I have to oppose the removal of run_tests.sh…
> > > despite how much *I'd* like to see it bite the dust!
> > 
> > Err.. you can just run the commands in tox.ini in the venv of your
> > choice. You don't need run_tests.sh for that.
> 
> No dice.  I don't want to have to parse the tox.ini directly.  We're
> talking about automated tests here, by the way.

Why not? It's an ini file, with a stable interface.

Python 3.4.0 (default, Apr 11 2014, 13:05:11) 
[GCC 4.8.2] on linux
Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more information.
>>> import configparser
>>> x = configparser.ConfigParser()
>>> x.read('tox.ini')
['tox.ini']
>>> x.get('testenv', 'commands')
"\npython setup.py testr --slowest --testr-args='{posargs}'"
>>> 

I'm sure you've thought more about this than me, so I apologize for
sounding dense. However, I'm struggling to see where having to maintain
two test harnesses is less complicated than the code above.