BACKPORT: Introduction of Config.invocation_args #6870
Conversation
| @@ -92,6 +92,7 @@ Evan Kepner | |||
| Fabien Zarifian | |||
| Fabio Zadrozny | |||
| Feng Ma | |||
| Fernando Mezzabotta Rey | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm not sure if this the thing to do when back-porting things. If it's not, let me know! Just following the steps-to-contribute 🙂
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It is definitely the right thing! 👍
fermezz
force-pushed
the
backport-invocation-args
branch
from
ac2426e to
4d8ab35
Compare
| @@ -17,9 +17,9 @@ are available on PyPI. | |||
|
|
|||
| While pytest ``5.0`` will be the new mainstream and development version, until **January 2020** | |||
| the pytest core team plans to make bug-fix releases of the pytest ``4.6`` series by | |||
| back-porting patches to the ``4.6-maintenance`` branch that affect Python 2 users. | |||
| back-porting patches to the ``4.6.x`` branch that affect Python 2 users. | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Since there is not an actual 4.6-maintenance branch, I changed it for what I believe is correct. This should probably be in master as well. I can make that happen if I get confirmation that that's ok.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
No need to port to master, we have changed that significantly already: https://docs.pytest.org/en/latest/py27-py34-deprecation.html
|
imo this patch extends beyond "bugfix" and probably shouldn't be backported -- curious to hear others thoughts though |
|
Yeah, the way I think about it is that this change, although feature, was specifically introduced to fix a bug in the interaction with That said, I'm open to suggestions. I can maybe find a workaround for my specific use case, but I'm probably not the only one still not being able to update to 5.1 (because of Python 2). What do you think? |
|
@fermezz For the Travis config check https://github.com/blueyed/pytest/blob/my-4.6-maintenance/.travis.yml, where it still works. |
fermezz
force-pushed
the
backport-invocation-args
branch
from
4d8ab35 to
fa20313
Compare
|
Thanks @blueyed. I'll give it a shot at fixing that up, although I don't see a lot of differences beyond having fewer jobs to build 🤔. |
fermezz
force-pushed
the
backport-invocation-args
branch
from
29680e0 to
123e16e
Compare
fermezz
force-pushed
the
backport-invocation-args
branch
from
123e16e to
7797a89
Compare
As per comment: pytest-dev#6870 (comment)
As per comment: pytest-dev#6870 (comment)
As per comment: pytest-dev#6870 (comment)
As per comment: pytest-dev#6870 (comment) Co-authored-by: Daniel Hahler <[email protected]>
While I agree that technically it is a (small) new feature, the main reason this was created was for a bug fix in xdist as @fermezz mentioned. Given that this allows to use a more recent pytest-xdist version which fixed a serious config problem, I think we can open an exception. 👍 |
| @@ -0,0 +1 @@ | |||
| New ``Config.invocation_args`` attribute containing the unchanged arguments passed to ``pytest.main()``. | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Let's add a remark here:
| New ``Config.invocation_args`` attribute containing the unchanged arguments passed to ``pytest.main()``. | |
| New ``Config.invocation_args`` attribute containing the unchanged arguments passed to ``pytest.main()``. | |
| Remark: while this is technically a new feature and according to our `policy <https://docs.pytest.org/en/latest/py27-py34-deprecation.html#what-goes-into-4-6-x-releases>`_ it should not have been backported, we have opened an exception in this particular case because it fixes a serious interaction with ``pytest-xdist``, so it can also be considered a bugfix. |
@asottile what do you think?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
👍 makes it much more clear that this is one-off and not a greenlight to resume features on 4.6
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Remark added, it makes a lot of sense.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Oh just noticed this was not added in the end.
No worries, I will update directly on #7199. 👍
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I committed it locally and never pushed 🤦. Sorry about that
There was a problem hiding this comment.
No problem 😁
4.6.10 has been released btw! 👍
|
I added a remark to be clear that this is a one time thing about backporting a feature. We should rebase this branch after #6884 is merged so that we can have a successful travis run before merging it. |
fermezz
force-pushed
the
backport-invocation-args
branch
from
409344b to
a6029ff
Compare
|
Thoughts about this one? |
|
@fermezz sorry about the delay, we were resolving some internal issues. Thanks a lot for the PR! |
|
@nicoddemus I heard, sorry you had to figured that out, but I'm glad y'all are back! And thanks for assisting!! |
This change was first introduced in #5564 but, logically, only since the
5.1.xversion. I'm back-porting it into the4.6.xbranch since many people still use it in the meantime they migrate to Python 3.I was also able to test this backport to be working successfully locally.