Open GoogleCodeExporter opened 8 years ago
Not that I know of but it sounds like a good enhancement
Original comment by kumar.mcmillan
on 13 Jul 2011 at 3:08
Maybe I could help to push this forward. Let me know.
Original comment by nicolas....@gmail.com
on 14 Jul 2011 at 1:35
that would be great if you have some time to write a patch for it. See
DEVELOPERS.txt for info on running the test suite. Be sure to grab the latest
code from the stable branch
http://code.google.com/p/python-nose/source/checkout since there were some
multiprocessing fixes a couple hours ago.
Original comment by kumar.mcmillan
on 14 Jul 2011 at 4:25
Sounds good. Here is a first stab: https://gist.github.com/1082998
Original comment by nicolas....@gmail.com
on 14 Jul 2011 at 6:00
BTW, any plan on moving to github? I believe that most open source projects
that moved there got a big boost in contributions. Just my 2 bitcoins ;-)
Original comment by nicolas....@gmail.com
on 14 Jul 2011 at 6:02
The patch looks pretty good but will need a regression test and a mention in
the docs about the new behavior.
As for github, I'd love to use github instead but we invested a lot into google
code before github was on the map; it would be hard to switch. Google Code has
some adequate code reviewing features though. You can fork it using your
Google account or you can also send pull requests against this one:
https://bitbucket.org/kumar303/nose
Original comment by kumar.mcmillan
on 14 Jul 2011 at 6:18
Added a test and some docs: https://gist.github.com/1082998
Original comment by nicolas....@gmail.com
on 15 Jul 2011 at 1:22
Let me know what you think.
BTW, what's your timeline for 1.1.0 ?
Original comment by nicolas....@gmail.com
on 19 Jul 2011 at 5:30
Kumar,
Is there anything I should do to get this in, do you want me to pull request
from bitbucket?
Thanks.
n
Original comment by nicolas....@gmail.com
on 20 Aug 2011 at 7:18
[deleted comment]
up?
Original comment by nicolas....@gmail.com
on 5 Sep 2011 at 5:24
up (again) ?
Original comment by nicolas....@gmail.com
on 27 Oct 2011 at 1:51
I just committed some fixes to multiprocessing plugin. Could you update your
patch against the latest code?
in addition, I'd like to suggest not changing the behavior of _multiprocess_ =
False, instead introduce _multiprocess_ = None (or some other value) which
would run the context sequentially in the main process. I think there are cases
where the mere presence of multiprocessing import would cause trouble for some
tests, so it's better if we could keep a way for user to opt out of running
context with multiprocessing plugin enabled.
Original comment by liucou...@gmail.com
on 2 Nov 2011 at 6:05
Original issue reported on code.google.com by
nicolas....@gmail.com
on 13 Jul 2011 at 7:20