[TIP] suitability of unittest.py for large-scale tests

Douglas Philips dgou at mac.com
Tue Apr 7 06:27:59 PDT 2009

On or about 2009 Apr 7, at 8:40 AM, Laura Creighton indited:
> At any rate, somebody was saying that they wanted the behaviour that
> when a test failed, everything came to a screeching halt, because
> otherwise it is too hard to lose the failing test in the
> voluminous output.  I understand this.  But sometimes what you want
> to do is to change something, and then divide up all the failing
> tests among the team.


It might have been my message, but since you didn't find it, I'm not  
sure if my reply will be on target or not.

What I want is for everything to come to a screeching halt if there is  
an error -loading- a test module. i.e. before any tests are even run.

My experience has been that if the regression runner simply reports  
that a module failed to load(import), that is what is too easy to get  

But you reminded me, our custom regression runner has a "halt on first  
failure" option. We added that option so that someone working on a new  
device doesn't have to wait for the entire regression to finish (we  
have an open TODO for graceful shutdown, which for us is tricky since  
the device shouldn't be left in certain states for very long). For my  
test team's use, we always want to run all the tests to get an  
overview of how functional the device(s) are.


More information about the testing-in-python mailing list