Reactivate some of the unit tests #146
Conversation
Handle more types of input (that is used in the code) * If no filename, don't backup * if the file is a string, convert it to a Path Make the backup non interactive, since the functionality is not exposed in the gui and used in tests.
Reactivate test_db, test_exportManager, test_importer and test_web_importer since fixes to backup_database makes most tests run again in those files. In test_db remove some magic constants for initial database to make tests run.
* Use pytest instead of unittest * PEP8 formating * Variable naming to make easier to read * Use "proper" unicode characters instead of binary strings
…ot appear to pass locally without a database instance available
…ected behaviour for test_convert.testAdjustments?)
…nteractive_importer module fails when run individually, but passes when run as part of a larger pytest suite?)
src/gourmand/backends/db.py
Outdated
|
|
||
| while backup_name.is_file(): | ||
| backup_name = backup_name.with_name(backup_name.name + 'I') | ||
|
|
||
| show_message( |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Todo:
- As noted, this informational message needs to be restored
elsewhere.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
A more-relevant hyperlink about the informational message: https://github.com/MrShark/gourmand/commit/b6b8d18854585bdc50cb3338f49bfeab67cf49af
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What do you think about the approach taken in feb0d5a @cydanil @MrShark?
It uses a SQLite 'in-memory' URI for the database. That means that self.filename for the database is empty, and the backup is skipped.
It feels a little fragile - it's relying on a series of interconnected things fitting together. But it works (tests pass, and the UI doesn't display the 'backup' message -- but should still do during interactive usage when a database upgrade occurs).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
(I'd probably like to attempt to find a better solution, but until then.. review & feedback welcome)
![github-advanced-security[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/57789?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
…(it'll likely change, but this is me trying to understand what the problem with it is during testing) Partially reverts commit b6b8d18.
…of a tempfile-backed datbase
|
@cydanil a notification to let you know that I'm closing this pull request and deleting the branch / source -- not because I sense any problem with it as-is, but I have this background tendency to want to remove old/stale projects and code that I'm not actively developing and/or that don't seem to be going anywhere (it's a bit like removing unnecessary global variables, or something - reducing the working memory of things to context-switch between). You're welcome to include and use/merge the code if you like, but no problem if not! (lengthy explanation for probably a trivial action, I know :)) |
And by this I purely refer to this pull request! I should've been clearer. I hope all the best for Gourmand :) |
Description
Reactivates some of Gourmand's unit tests, largely by picking up some work-in-progress by @MrShark.
How Has This Been Tested?
Run locally using
pytest; some test modules were run individually to check whether they pass in isolation from the rest of the test suite (not all do: some of the Importer modules in particular seem to rely on database setup that occurs when other Python modules are loaded during test suite run)Types of changes
Checklist:
My change requires a change to the documentation.I have updated the documentation accordingly.