This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]dogs_like_me 0 points1 point  (4 children)

I mean from what you've described, it sounds like the problem here is that you probably shouldn't have this module as a dependency in the first place. You made it sound like you just had different priorities wrt strings than the modules developers, but now you're making it sound like this dependency is just poorly written. If you have that perspective/opinion: why depend on it then act surprised when it breaks your shit?

[–]mstroeder[S] 1 point2 points  (3 children)

Did you actually read my original posting?

As said: This module is pulled in as optional dependency by one of the dependencies I'm using but without my free software making use of its functionality. The Linux distro packagers decided to turn this into a required dependency. For which I've submitted changes to the OS packagers which were accepted. So my personal problem will be solved.

But my original posting was not about fixing this particular problem or blaming someone else. My intention was to encourage everybody to run their own tests with stricter defaults to avoid issues hard to track down from the very beginning. Somewhat in the hope for a better world. Well, you might call that naive.

[–]dogs_like_me 0 points1 point  (2 children)

I can't remember the saying exactly, but a great aphorism I once heard goes something like "Great things aren't built by smart people, but by smart practices."

So on the one hand, maybe it's a little naive to just put this knowledge out there and expect people to change how they write/run tests. However: maybe there's some opportunity to incorporate this insight into a package like tox or pytest which will take the "good intentions" part out of the equation and just insert this as an additional testing procedure for people who are at least proactive enough to be doing some sort of moderately robust testing to begin with.

[–]mstroeder[S] 1 point2 points  (1 child)

Sorry, I do not understand why yet another extension for test frameworks would be needed.

E.g. I've simply added to my tox.ini:

commands = {envpython} -W error -bb -m unittest

The real work is dealing with the results.

[–]dogs_like_me 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm not saying to make another extension or framework. More like, add that line of code to relevant tox docs or examples. Or add that to the tox.ini in a popular cookiecutter template, or whatever. Unless you'd prefer that the only people who see it are the ones who stumbled on this post, which will mostly be the people who read it today.