Merge lp:~vila/bzr/783472-wt-scenarios into lp:bzr
Proposed by
Vincent Ladeuil
Status: | Merged | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Approved by: | Vincent Ladeuil | ||||
Approved revision: | no longer in the source branch. | ||||
Merged at revision: | 5875 | ||||
Proposed branch: | lp:~vila/bzr/783472-wt-scenarios | ||||
Merge into: | lp:bzr | ||||
Diff against target: |
64 lines (+27/-7) 2 files modified
bzrlib/tests/per_workingtree/__init__.py (+24/-7) doc/en/release-notes/bzr-2.4.txt (+3/-0) |
||||
To merge this branch: | bzr merge lp:~vila/bzr/783472-wt-scenarios | ||||
Related bugs: |
|
Reviewer | Review Type | Date Requested | Status |
---|---|---|---|
bzr-core | Pending | ||
Review via email: mp+61117@code.launchpad.net |
Commit message
Add an helper for per_workingtree scenarios that plugins can reuse
Description of the change
I used to use wt_scenarios in per_workingtree in one of my plugins.
This disappeared recently (the helper wasn't particularly well documented to be honest) and I didn't realize that until recently.
This mp re-introduce the helper.
As mentioned in the bug, this another valid use case to reuse tests and it would be nice to keep it in mind for our other parameterized tests (I don't intend to fix that pro-actively though).
To post a comment you must log in.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 05/16/2011 03:42 PM, Vincent Ladeuil wrote: /bugs.launchpad .net/bzr/ +bug/783472 /code.launchpad .net/~vila/ bzr/783472- wt-scenarios/ +merge/ 61117
> Vincent Ladeuil has proposed merging lp:~vila/bzr/783472-wt-scenarios into lp:bzr.
>
> Requested reviews:
> bzr-core (bzr-core)
> Related bugs:
> Bug #783472 in Bazaar: "per_working_tree should provide reusable scenarios"
> https:/
>
> For more details, see:
> https:/
>
> I used to use wt_scenarios in per_workingtree in one of my plugins.
>
> This disappeared recently (the helper wasn't particularly well documented to be honest) and I didn't realize that until recently.
>
> This mp re-introduce the helper.
>
> As mentioned in the bug, this another valid use case to reuse tests and it would be nice to keep it in mind for our other parameterized tests (I don't intend to fix that pro-actively though).
I'm fine re-introducing this. But if you actually depend on it
externally, it sounds like something that needs a test case so that we
don't delete it without letting people know.
John
=:->
review:needsfixing
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- enigmail. mozdev. org/
RMCIACgkQJdeBCY SNAAOapACfTfwK7 UE4Qbk2cjJ3ccUO MBWh YSOkPz09PD7ADng 75
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://
iEYEARECAAYFAk3
PqgAoJi46jYJ5Mj
=UcnS
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----