Code review comment for lp:~lifeless/bzr/subunit

On Wed, 2009-12-16 at 03:03 +0000, John A Meinel wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Robert Collins wrote:
> > I plan to land this this afternoon or perhaps tomorrow. Testtools 0.9.2 has been released, and the package is in debian. I can upload that to e.g. the bzr beta PPA.
> >
> > There is a subunit 0.0.3 release as well, which makes --parallel=fork, ec2test and plain --subunit include separate attachments for the log files (but the fallback behaviour in testtools will include those anyway just not structured as such.
>
> Do you have any idea whether this will destroy the win32 test suite?

Yes, it won't.

> Or
> mac, or anything that doesn't have a deb package infrastructure? I
> realize you are antsy to move forward, but given I just got win32
> running again, I'd rather not have a serious breakdown at this point. (I
> expect it to *probably* be ok, if you can get the right packages installed.)

All you need is python-testtools (available via pypi, easy_install,
launchpad tarball or bzr branch lp:testtools), and python
2.4/2.5/2.6/2.7/3.1/3.2.

> The comments you've received certainly haven't been "this looks good,
> let's land it", so I'm a bit surprised you are pushing this hard. Maybe
> I'm wrong, but it feels like the conversation hasn't finished yet.

Martin Pool provided some comments, which I've considered and acted on
most of. He said 'maybe more later', that was 9 days ago; Martin [gz]
said 'not as much benefit as expected', and I've asked how much he
expected.

I have no sense of ongoing discussion about this; its been blocked on
testtools releasing an appropriate release - which it has now, and given
the absence of negative reviews, am planning on exercising the soft
timeout our review process has rather than delaying indefinitely. There
has been discussion on list about the general issue of dependencies, and
the outcome there was 'put it up and we can discuss it' (as I recall) -
which is what I've done. I also recall Martin (Pool) saying somewhere
that he is convinced that testtools has useful features and active
maintainers and he is ok with a dependency on it.

Of course, if you are concerned about it I'll hold off landing it, but
I'd like some articulation of concerns so that I can act on them. This
is important to me because I don't like writing code twice, and bzr's
current unittest structure forces me to do so.

This patch doesn't do any OS specific changes, so its very unlikely to
have an OS specific fallout. Gordon's positive feedback is an indicator
that its probably ok.

-Rob