[TIP] including (or not) tests within your package
olemis at gmail.com
Thu Aug 12 05:56:58 PDT 2010
On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 7:14 AM, Olemis Lang <olemis at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 4:04 AM, Fernando Perez <fperez.net at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 12:38 AM, Ben Finney <ben+python at benfinney.id.au> wrote:
>>> Fernando Perez <fperez.net at gmail.com> writes:
>> Ultimately all I can say is that I have *extensive, real-world*
>> evidence of this approach having worked *fantastically* well for
>> ipython, numpy, scipy, nipy.*, etc over the last few years.
> The same can be stated by people that don't include tests in packages
In fact , check out any Ubuntu | Debian repos & you'll realize many
instances for which there will be the following pkgs for a single
- deb-src package (i.e. source package).
- app-doc deb package (i.e. binary package to install docs).
- app-dbg deb package (i.e. binary package to install the
app with debug symbols).
- app deb package (i.e. binary package to install the app).
That might be slightly different in Python because of the
characteristics of the language but the following one-to-one
relationship wouldn't be as crazy as it seems
- deb-src package will become sdists.
- app-doc deb package might become docs package ,
but sometimes PyApps -e.g. *my* PyApps- are self
documented, anyways ...
- app-dbg deb package might become either bdist package
installing only the test suite (which might also be a different
pkg named app-tests or whatever ...) or the app with test suite +
test deps + ...
- app deb package will become the binary package installing
*ONLY* the app , and nothing else
PS: I just noticed that pkg naming conventions when I tried to install
few minutes ago gstreamer plugins in Ubuntu Lucid , so that's a good &
real place to start the research
Blog ES: http://simelo-es.blogspot.com/
Blog EN: http://simelo-en.blogspot.com/
More information about the testing-in-python