[TIP] unitteset outcomes (pass/fail/xfail/error), humans and automation

Olemis Lang olemis at gmail.com
Tue Dec 15 06:45:50 PST 2009

On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 5:16 AM, Robert Collins
<robertc at robertcollins.net> wrote:
> On Tue, 2009-12-15 at 10:21 +0100, holger krekel wrote:
>> Hum, designing API interactions for combining plugins for timeout-ing
>> tests,
>> tracing/coverage, distributed-testing, CI-integration, randomizing
>> tests,
>> enhanced PDB ... just to name a few, i find somewhat tricky.  So i
>> rather
>> think about standardizing output produced by the various testing
>> tools,
>> to ease post processing/reporting and to establish a common
>> understanding.

And also to treat then uniformly . I mean I am using testing framework
X and suddenly switch to TF Y and that's transparent for all apps
processing the test results (CI slaves or whatever ;o) ...

> Well, on the standardising output front, have you looked at subunit ? :)
> It aims at precisely that, with current included support for outputtin
> it from pyunit, shunit, cppunit, 'check' (A C xUnit implementation),
> converting to junit's xml format (which nearly all CI tools and many
> IDE's understand) :)

... the serialization of the test results is another subject , but could be
simpler if all TFs report test results following a well-known
(model | pattern | standard | specification ...)

> I think the API interactions for the things you mention are well
> addressable, though in a few different ways.

Yes, but let's go step by step and focus on test outcomes first , isn't it ?



Blog ES: http://simelo-es.blogspot.com/
Blog EN: http://simelo-en.blogspot.com/

Featured article:
Free jacknife 1.3.4 v2 Download - mac software  -

More information about the testing-in-python mailing list