[ZODB-Dev] breaking out the transaction module from ZODB

[Jim Fulton]

On Nov 9, 2007, at 9:29 AM, Chris McDonough wrote:

> On Nov 9, 2007, at 8:41 AM, Jim Fulton wrote:
>
>>
>> On Nov 9, 2007, at 8:31 AM, Chris McDonough wrote:
>>> It also contains TimeStamp, which will get moved out of persistent.
>>
>> Why?
>>
>> I don't see any uses of TimeStamp by the transaction package.  In  
>> your new package, it is only used by its tests.
>
> D'oh!  You're right.  Out it goes.  I wrote tests for it, I'll add  
> them to the persistent package.

Thanks!

>>> The tests work (reqt's are downloaded) if you do "setup.py test -q"
>>
>> Yawn.  IMO, the test command in setuptools is a waste of time,  
>> because it doesn't work with anything else.
>
> It runs all the tests, even the doctests, if thats what you mean.   
> See the "additional_tests" hair in the test modules.

My point is that the meta data you added to the setup.py only works  
with setup.py.  It isn't accessible to any other test runners.  I  
shouldn't have yawned.  It is significant that the tests work. :)  I  
just don't find this way of running the tests to be useful.  The  
first time I work on this package, I'll add a buildout.cfg so I can  
use the Zope test runner.  At that point, I'll have to deal with  
these extra requirements in another way (which is no big deal).

>> zope.interface is a real requirement.  It is already in  
>> test_requires.
>>
>> Over time, we need to clean up the transaction tests so they don't  
>> use ZODB.
>
> Yeah, given that we're name this thing "transaction", it's an  
> actually an immediate requirement.

If you are going to spend the time, then, uh, sure. ;)  Seriously,  
while I would love to see this cleaned up, I don't think I would  
consider this super urgent.  I guess that depends on competing  
priorities.

>   There's only one test that uses anything that can't be mocked up  
> in the transaction package (it uses an actual MappingStorage and a  
> DB) itself.  It also happens to be the one that fails right now; I  
> haven't tried to understand it yet.

Gah.  BTW, if you haven't already, you should check for transaction  
tests lurking in the other ZODB packages.

Jim

--
Jim Fulton
Zope Corporation