[TIP] Defining a convention for running tests, #2

[Olemis Lang]

On Sat, Feb 27, 2010 at 5:51 PM, Michael Foord
<fuzzyman at voidspace.org.uk> wrote:
> On 27/02/2010 22:32, Robert Collins wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, 2010-02-27 at 22:12 +0000, Michael Foord wrote:
>>
[...]
>>
>> They don't *need* to. Thats the point.
>>
[...]
>>
>
> Ok, I'm not sure if that meets Titus' use case - but then if the package has
> a dependency on a specific test runner (nose, py.test, unittest2 or
> whatever)

No

> That leads to an interesting point - what if a package has dependencies that
> are only needed to run tests (like testtools, testresources etc).

JFYI

PJE mentioned and explained  in a separate thread the use of
setuptools `tests_require`

-- 
Regards,

Olemis.

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

Featured article:
Adding handling of uncaught exceptions from protocols.  -
http://bitbucket.org/osimons/trac-rpc-mq/changeset/9b81bf0731a7/