On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 09:36:50AM -0400, Barry Warsaw wrote: > There *are* however proven, stable tools that improve the Python coding and > maintenance experience and for me, tox is one of those. There are others, > such as nose2, that I won't even start a new project without adopting from the > first commit. I'm happy to help people who are interesting in learning more > about these tools, and welcome a discussion with others about what tools and > techniques they find must-have for Python development. I had a quick look at tox. It seems to maintain different virtualenv setup, autoinstalling dependencies via pip, and then running the test suite in all of them. Since tox uses pip, which installs software to be run as my own user skipping the usual Debian trust chain, does it give any guarantee that I won't be running untrusted, unverified code as my user in my machine? Is https://github.com/pypa/pip/issues/425 still relevant? This said, in code that will be deployed in production systems I normally target debian stable and not arbitrary virtualenv setups[1], so for testing dual-python code I would rather be interested in a tool that runs the test suite in the main system, but runs it once per locally installed interpreter. Is there anything that beats a script like this for this purpose? #!/bin/sh nose2-2.7 "$@" nose2-3.4 "$@" Enrico [1] http://www.enricozini.org/2014/debian/debops/ -- GPG key: 4096R/E7AD5568 2009-05-08 Enrico Zini <enrico@enricozini.org>
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature