[TIP] does licensing of test tools matter?

Jesse Noller jnoller at gmail.com
Wed Aug 5 07:49:58 PDT 2009

On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 10:23 AM, holger krekel<holger at merlinux.eu> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 05, 2009 at 09:31 +0200, holger krekel wrote:
>> Hi TIP,
>> i was wondering the other day - is licensing of test libs and
>> tools and issue for anyone here?
> let me re-phrase to have a more concise question: did anyone
> actually base their past choice of a testing tool on its license?
> My impression so far was: nobody did.  And i haven't heart anything
> to the contrary yet.  Makes sense, i guess, from a practical point
> of view as (so far) running a test tool is separated from the
> actual distribution and deployment of the code under test.
> cheers,
> holger

Yes. I have actually worked with someone who refused to use a GPL
framework, instead paying cash for a proprietary tool due to licensing
fears. I have also had to "roll my own" due to this.

Personally; I've already ask Jason if getting a MIT/BSD licensed
version of Nose out there would be possible. I use it heavily; but
stick to just plugin development as much as possible. I use it because
it's "the best" for my use case, but use it in the most "hands off"
way possible. I would prefer that this not be the case.


More information about the testing-in-python mailing list