Merge lp:~ricardokirkner/u1-test-utils/assert-log-with-traceback into lp:u1-test-utils
Proposed by
Ricardo Kirkner
Status: | Merged |
---|---|
Approved by: | Ricardo Kirkner |
Approved revision: | 37 |
Merged at revision: | 35 |
Proposed branch: | lp:~ricardokirkner/u1-test-utils/assert-log-with-traceback |
Merge into: | lp:u1-test-utils |
Diff against target: |
65 lines (+37/-4) 2 files modified
u1testutils/logging.py (+8/-4) u1testutils/selftests/unit/test_logging.py (+29/-0) |
To merge this branch: | bzr merge lp:~ricardokirkner/u1-test-utils/assert-log-with-traceback |
Related bugs: |
Reviewer | Review Type | Date Requested | Status |
---|---|---|---|
Leo Arias (community) | code review | Approve | |
Review via email: mp+151032@code.launchpad.net |
Commit message
Allow assertLogLevelC
Description of the change
Allow assertLogLevelC
To post a comment you must log in.
<elopio> pindonga: shouldn't this parameter has_traceback=False be called check_traceback ?
<pindonga> I can change that if that name is better
<elopio> pindonga: when I read it, I thought that it was going to fail if has_traceback=False and there was a traceback on the log entry.
<pindonga> k
<elopio> or the contrary. But has_traceback=False only ignores the traceback check. So for me, that would be a better name.
<elopio> for the rest, +1
<elopio> pindonga: oh, and also on line 16, I would find it clearer with an elif.
<pindonga> it's exactly the same, yes? bc of the return
<pindonga> but I can change that if it makes you happier
<pindonga> :)
<pindonga> elopio: revno 37 pushed
<elopio> pindonga: yes, it's exactly the same. But it takes one less second to notice that you will never enter in that code block. That's why I said "I find it clearer", it also means, feel free to ignore me whenever you want :)