From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp1 ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms11 with LMTPS id APgMBdhiF1+mTgAA0tVLHw (envelope-from ) for ; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 21:49:12 +0000 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp1 with LMTPS id YArMANhiF1+iLgAAbx9fmQ (envelope-from ) for ; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 21:49:12 +0000 Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by aspmx1.migadu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E672994051E for ; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 21:49:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1]:60916 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jy08K-0001Fn-I1 for larch@yhetil.org; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 17:49:08 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:58562) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jy08E-0001Fa-PL for guix-patches@gnu.org; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 17:49:02 -0400 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:57266) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jy08E-0001pG-Gb for guix-patches@gnu.org; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 17:49:02 -0400 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1jy08E-0002Jb-FM for guix-patches@gnu.org; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 17:49:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: [bug#42082] [PATCH 1/6] gnu: Add python-covdefaults. Resent-From: Marius Bakke Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: guix-patches@gnu.org Resent-Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2020 21:49:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 42082 X-GNU-PR-Package: guix-patches X-GNU-PR-Keywords: patch To: Vinicius Monego , 42082@debbugs.gnu.org Received: via spool by 42082-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B42082.15953681078858 (code B ref 42082); Tue, 21 Jul 2020 21:49:02 +0000 Received: (at 42082) by debbugs.gnu.org; 21 Jul 2020 21:48:27 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:40579 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1jy07e-0002Io-Rt for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 17:48:27 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:36728) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1jy07c-0002Ia-LW for 42082@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 17:48:25 -0400 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:36814) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jy07X-0001lU-4Z; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 17:48:19 -0400 Received: from 84-52-226.102.3p.ntebredband.no ([84.52.226.102]:47162 helo=localhost) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1jy07W-0005lV-HM; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 17:48:19 -0400 From: Marius Bakke In-Reply-To: <9787249e066d55ae94bbd08f2c0b9dedfa3137bb.camel@posteo.net> References: <20200627154645.64264-1-monego@posteo.net> <87365lj3eu.fsf@gnu.org> <9787249e066d55ae94bbd08f2c0b9dedfa3137bb.camel@posteo.net> Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2020 23:48:07 +0200 Message-ID: <874kq0fsko.fsf@gnu.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) X-BeenThere: guix-patches@gnu.org List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-patches-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-patches" X-Scanner: scn0 Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of guix-patches-bounces@gnu.org designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=guix-patches-bounces@gnu.org X-Spam-Score: -3.11 X-TUID: UfcjMaWss/uT --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Vinicius Monego writes: > Em seg, 2020-07-20 =C3=A0s 23:13 +0200, Marius Bakke escreveu: >> Hi Vinicius, > > Hello Marius, > > Thanks for the tips! > >> We now have a 'python-check.scm' which is preferable to >> check.scm. Can >> you add this library there instead? > > Sure. I overlooked that file. I sent another series of 6 pytest patches > before this, and will send a v2 for that as well. Excellent, thank you. >> Should pytest be propagated here? >>=20 >> Also, as this package is a plugin for coverage, maybe it should not >> propagate coverage either. The reason is that propagating prevents >> it >> from being (easily) used with other versions of coverage. Let's say >> that a package needs a newer coverage than the default in Guix + this >> plugin, propagation here would bring in the wrong coverage version. > > Oh, I thought that the pytest binary should be available as an > executable for the plugin to be used, similar to how APT has pytest as > a dependency for plugins. Maybe it's just me thinking in terms of > traditional package management. > > The PyPI importer will propagate pytest by default, and it's common to > see it propagated in other plugins in check.scm. But now I see that > many plugins do not propagate it. Should pytest not be an input at all > (unless the plugin uses it for its own tests, in which case it should > be a native input)? There are differing opinions on this matter :-) I would say that pytest should _not_ be propagated in this case, so that the plugin can be used with custom versions of pytest. Others might say that the plugin is useless without pytest, and so it _should_ be propagated. I'll leave the final say to you. :-) >> I know it's a lot to ask :-) but can you try to expand on how it >> differs >> from the apparently unreasonable defaults in coverage? "Sensible" >> also >> borders on "marketing speak", perhaps "opinionated" is a better term. > > That's a slight rewording of the author's description in the > repository, and that's the only verbal information I could find about > the project. The differences can be seen in the README and in the > source code, but I don't know what to write about them, or even why the > changes are 'more sensible'. Right, not great. We should at least try and stay neutral (see the "Synopses and Descriptions" section of the manual). So s/sensible/opinionated/ is good enough for me. --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEzBAEBCgAdFiEEu7At3yzq9qgNHeZDoqBt8qM6VPoFAl8XYpgACgkQoqBt8qM6 VPrvpgf/cRZsCBzZ8xN5magCy9Pp/CEAW81Wj/MXvjFmlfV/qLX2x7+osT7E8qWO ZB5TeVoNc/Zz0IjoXxIuDePLYkY7hNxCoaPPSZoZRBMHZvJIws9zOAnlYptlzo/b ISOmadoDhhEPi+u+cdJepLEYzHJqcRPncqB4C+jlEt5hvA/6L/BaV9Pyp8AKwinS jcR18myoinAv59GWs+9WycHPEEVktuyWfHz3hnsHQiYNgzxhTTVS4EhxDVm8uMEM CJubYBbC+HLS3OZTcskHGODU4l18/9MlagA7miCG997YAZUq6o4Q+YfwpApg/hvc cZIoCtK8q8TW0rfRlXdTvj3Ancvfrg== =Qy+2 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--