[TIP] including (or not) tests within your package
jorge.vargas at gmail.com
Tue Jul 27 06:58:23 PDT 2010
On Jul 26, 2010 8:19 PM, "Alfredo Deza" <alfredodeza at gmail.com> wrote:
> A few weeks ago in our local Python meeting someone mentioned what a drag
> was to (most of the time) have to download
> the source for a package they have just installed to run the tests because
> the 'test(s)' directory was not included at the time
> of installation.
> Some packages include them (like unittest2) and some (most?) don't.
> What do you guys feel about including the test directory within your
> so it is included at the time of installation?
> I'm gearing towards including them, but wanted to hear your opinion about
Speaking from my experience from framework development the general consensus
is that test-in-packages make things more complicated, as complex packages
tend to have additional test dependencies and sometimes you need a special
setup for some of them and tests just bloat the userspace if they are
Personally other than running on other platforms/setups the core team lacks
I don't see any benefit from having the tests in package. At worst of any of
those tests fails under some obscure situation they should be catch by the
And if you as an end user are submitting a patch and want to run the test, I
expect you to have a fork or checkout, instead of a plain old patch which
means you are downloding the whole thing anyway.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the testing-in-python