Port topology module #1420
Port topology module #1420
Conversation
This should hopefully get coverage back to normal. |
@richardjgowers @kain88-de Minor increase in coverage! A review would be helpful. |
Style is much better than in the PR on I did not notice any tests that are missing, but I figured out why I had test that appeared discovered in pytest but not in nose: while we generally avoided docstring in tests to have a readable log in nose, we still have some. Nose does display the docstring instead of the test name in the verbose view; pytest doesn't. It means that it is difficult to accurately compare the two logs, but also that we will be able to have docstrings in tests. Yeah! |
@@ -1,19 +1,22 @@ | |||
from __future__ import absolute_import | |||
from numpy.testing import ( |
jbarnoud
Jun 23, 2017
Contributor
Please, fix the import order.
Please, fix the import order.
@@ -63,42 +66,81 @@ class TPRBase(TPRAttrs): | |||
# All these classes should be generated in a loop. Yet, nose test generation | |||
# seems to work only with functions, and not with classes. | |||
class TestTPR400(TPRBase): | |||
|
|||
__test__ = True |
jbarnoud
Jun 23, 2017
Contributor
This all file will be much better with fixtures. Not for this PR, but this test suite will really profits from the move to pytest.
This all file will be much better with fixtures. Not for this PR, but this test suite will really profits from the move to pytest.
@jbarnoud @richardjgowers This should be ready to merge now. |
Apparently, the hostname "dropbox.com" cannot be resolved during the full build. |
We need more information. This message alone doesn't give me much when the build is restarted. When did it try to access dropbox would be valuable information for example. |
On 06/23/2017 04:48 PM, Max Linke wrote:
Apparently, the hostname "dropbox.com" cannot be resolved during
the full build.
We need more information. This message alone doesn't give me much when
the build is restarted. When did it try to access dropbox would be
valuable information for example.
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#1420 (comment)>,
or mute the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABUWuiSOGsbEOOPvKDxoUFXyDX9YTqemks5sG9BCgaJpZM4OBZLH>.
I did restart the job. Hole is downloaded from dropbox apparently. This
time, dropbox.com could not be resolved. It seams to be just a transient
error, the install phase is done now which means that dropox was found.
|
It tries to download some |
@kain88-de @richardjgowers Can I merge, or should I wait for 0.16.2 to be released? |
@jbarnoud yeah tests aren't user facing, so we can merge this |
Just some background: Or at least that was the story until 2 minutes ago when I figured out that hole is now open source: https://github.com/osmart/hole2 ... so I think we will soon have conda packages. ;-) #1429 |
@utkbansal So this PR didn't actually add topology to the pytest list in |
Oh man! Rebasing and stuff can be very confusing if you have 4 PRs in parallel. |
Put it in the xdist pr |
On 06/25/2017 01:09 PM, Richard Gowers wrote:
Put it in the xdist pr
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#1420 (comment)>,
or mute the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABUWukmyOaDP_1CI1hqmEbk3_rapJM3Hks5sHj_jgaJpZM4OBZLH>.
Just to reiterate a previous suggestion: having a file that list the
modules for nose and an other file that lists the modules for pytest
would reduce the need for rebasing.
One problem we currently have is that every PR from Utkarsh change the
same two lines in .travis.yml. Having the lists in separate files would
hopefully reduce the conflicts.
|
@jbarnoud Makes more sense now! |
Fixes #
Changes made in this Pull Request:
PR Checklist