Re: RFC: adding pytest as a supported test framework

From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Jacob Champion <jacob(dot)champion(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: RFC: adding pytest as a supported test framework
Date: 2024-06-10 20:46:56
Message-ID: 00c5efe6-1abb-42f8-a9a7-ed3a055c4b92@dunslane.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


On 2024-06-10 Mo 16:04, Andres Freund wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> Just for context for the rest the email: I think we desperately need to move
> off perl for tests. The infrastructure around our testing is basically
> unmaintained and just about nobody that started doing dev stuff in the last 10
> years learned perl.

Andres,

I get that you don't like perl. But it's hard for me to take this
terribly seriously. "desperately" seems like massive overstatement at
best. As for what up and coming developers learn, they mostly don't
learn C either, and that's far more critical to what we do.

I'm not sure what part of the testing infrastructure you think is
unmaintained. For example, the last release of Test::Simple was all the
way back on April 25.

Maybe there are some technical superiorities about what Jacob is
proposing, enough for us to add it to our armory. I'll keep an open mind
on that.

But let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater. Quite apart from
anything else, a wholesale rework of the test infrastructure would make
backpatching more painful.

cheers

andrew

--
Andrew Dunstan
EDB:https://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2024-06-10 21:39:35 Improve the granularity of PQsocketPoll's timeout parameter?
Previous Message Imseih (AWS), Sami 2024-06-10 20:12:46 Re: Track the amount of time waiting due to cost_delay