Hey everybody, I updated the docs regarding the upcoming Flask Extension approval process. Here is how it works: - make the necessary changes in your Flask extension to make it compliant with the ruleset. So far there is no extension that passes the guidelines due to the missing tests in the MANIFEST.in file. - reply to this thread once you think your extension passes, then I will check that and you can do the release. - once the release is on PyPI and passes, I will set the approved flag there. Once we have at half the extensions there approved, I will also display a little badge next to extensions that are approved. Links to the approval rules: http://flask.pocoo.org/docs/extensiondev/#approved-extensions If you have some suggestions regarding the ruleset, feel free to propose improvements. Regards, Armin
I think Flask-CouchDB is ready to be approved. (Since all I did was add the tests to MANIFEST.in and change a couple of fields in setup.py to do testing, I didn't make a new release, just replaced the tarball for 0.2 on PyPI.) If I added the tests right for this one, I will go ahead and do the same for Flask-Themes and Flask-Uploads, and then write some tests for Flask-XML-RPC so they can be included. On 07/23/2010 10:04 AM, Armin Ronacher wrote: > Hey everybody, > > I updated the docs regarding the upcoming Flask Extension approval > process. > > Regards, > Armin -- Regards, Matthew "LeafStorm" Frazier http://leafstorm.us/
Hi, On 7/26/10 3:07 AM, LeafStorm wrote: > I think Flask-CouchDB is ready to be approved. (Since all I did was add > the tests to MANIFEST.in and change a couple of fields in setup.py to do > testing, I didn't make a new release, just replaced the tarball for 0.2 > on PyPI. Are there any chances that you could revert that and upload the original 0.2 tarball with the same checksum and release the new as 0.2.1? Furthermore the tests fail on my machine. On Python 2.5, the with statement makes a syntax error, (from __future__ import with_statement is missing) and on other systems I get socket errors because they expect a couchdb system running. I yet have to figure out how to deal with that. Changing checksums are terrible and I would feel bad approving a release that replaced a release with the same version. Regards, Armin
On 07/26/2010 06:23 AM, Armin Ronacher wrote: > Hi, > > On 7/26/10 3:07 AM, LeafStorm wrote: >> I think Flask-CouchDB is ready to be approved. (Since all I did was add >> the tests to MANIFEST.in and change a couple of fields in setup.py to do >> testing, I didn't make a new release, just replaced the tarball for 0.2 >> on PyPI. > Are there any chances that you could revert that and upload the original > 0.2 tarball with the same checksum and release the new as 0.2.1? > Furthermore the tests fail on my machine. > > On Python 2.5, the with statement makes a syntax error, (from __future__ > import with_statement is missing) That's all my fault. I need to get a Python 2.5 running on my machine for tests. Unfortunately Arch Linux doesn't seem to ship separate Python versions, so it's going to be a bit of work. > and on other systems I get socket > errors because they expect a couchdb system running. I yet have to > figure out how to deal with that. Yeah, I'm not sure how you would deal with that either. You pretty much do need a live DB server to run the tests. > Changing checksums are terrible and I would feel bad approving a release > that replaced a release with the same version. That explains why Django releases a bugfix two days after they inevitably do something wrong packaging instead of reuploading a fixed tarball. I'll try and fix it. > Regards, > Armin -- Regards, Matthew "LeafStorm" Frazier http://leafstorm.us/
I reuploaded the original Flask-CouchDB 0.2 (I think - I didn't have the checksum written down anywhere) and released an 0.2.1 with the tests included and the Python 2.5 bug fixed. (Anyone else who runs Arch Linux, install python25 from the AUR to get an additional python2.5.) So, now I think it's ready for approval. -- Regards, Matthew "LeafStorm" Frazier http://leafstorm.us/
Hi LeafStorm, On 07/26/2010 03:30 PM, LeafStorm wrote: > On 07/26/2010 06:23 AM, Armin Ronacher wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On 7/26/10 3:07 AM, LeafStorm wrote: >>> I think Flask-CouchDB is ready to be approved. (Since all I did was add >>> the tests to MANIFEST.in and change a couple of fields in setup.py to do >>> testing, I didn't make a new release, just replaced the tarball for 0.2 >>> on PyPI. >> Are there any chances that you could revert that and upload the original >> 0.2 tarball with the same checksum and release the new as 0.2.1? >> Furthermore the tests fail on my machine. >> >> On Python 2.5, the with statement makes a syntax error, (from __future__ >> import with_statement is missing) > > That's all my fault. I need to get a Python 2.5 running on my machine > for tests. Unfortunately Arch Linux doesn't seem to ship separate Python > versions, so it's going to be a bit of work. You can compile and install python in a local bin directory ./configure --prefix=$HOME/local and after that, you will use the virtualenv scripts to generate a custom environment with your new version of python 2.5 Regards
Thanks, this is most helpful. I am likely to be very busy next week with paid work, so will not likely have the time to do more on my current extensions than serious bug fixes. However I'd like to get at least one extension passing next week, so any help offered to do so would be gratefully received. On 23 July 2010 15:04, Armin Ronacher <armin.ronacher@active-4.com> wrote: > Hey everybody, > > I updated the docs regarding the upcoming Flask Extension approval > process. Here is how it works: > > - make the necessary changes in your Flask extension to make it > compliant with the ruleset. So far there is no extension that > passes the guidelines due to the missing tests in the MANIFEST.in > file. > - reply to this thread once you think your extension passes, then I > will check that and you can do the release. > - once the release is on PyPI and passes, I will set the approved flag > there. > > Once we have at half the extensions there approved, I will also display > a little badge next to extensions that are approved. > > Links to the approval rules: > http://flask.pocoo.org/docs/extensiondev/#approved-extensions > > If you have some suggestions regarding the ruleset, feel free to propose > improvements. > > > Regards, > Armin >
Please take a look at the Flask-Script source http://bitbucket.org/danjac/flask-script - I'd like to do a 0.3 release by end of next week, so would like to check for compliance. On 23 July 2010 15:13, Dan Jacob <danjac354@gmail.com> wrote: > Thanks, this is most helpful. > > I am likely to be very busy next week with paid work, so will not > likely have the time to do more on my current extensions than serious > bug fixes. However I'd like to get at least one extension passing next > week, so any help offered to do so would be gratefully received. > > On 23 July 2010 15:04, Armin Ronacher <armin.ronacher@active-4.com> wrote: >> Hey everybody, >> >> I updated the docs regarding the upcoming Flask Extension approval >> process. Here is how it works: >> >> - make the necessary changes in your Flask extension to make it >> compliant with the ruleset. So far there is no extension that >> passes the guidelines due to the missing tests in the MANIFEST.in >> file. >> - reply to this thread once you think your extension passes, then I >> will check that and you can do the release. >> - once the release is on PyPI and passes, I will set the approved flag >> there. >> >> Once we have at half the extensions there approved, I will also display >> a little badge next to extensions that are approved. >> >> Links to the approval rules: >> http://flask.pocoo.org/docs/extensiondev/#approved-extensions >> >> If you have some suggestions regarding the ruleset, feel free to propose >> improvements. >> >> >> Regards, >> Armin >> >
Hi, On 7/23/10 4:23 PM, Dan Jacob wrote: > Please take a look at the Flask-Script source > http://bitbucket.org/danjac/flask-script - I'd like to do a 0.3 > release by end of next week, so would like to check for compliance. MANIFEST.in is missing, so the testsuite is not part of a source release. The same is true for the docs, you also might want to add these. Check the Flask-Babel extension which I just updated. Also, would be cool if the README file would actually contain anything that is related to the package. Regards, Armin
Thanks, wasn't quite clear on the requirement for MANIFEST.in. Maybe a note about that and README should be in requirements checklist ? On 23 July 2010 16:48, Armin Ronacher <armin.ronacher@active-4.com> wrote: > Hi, > > On 7/23/10 4:23 PM, Dan Jacob wrote: >> Please take a look at the Flask-Script source >> http://bitbucket.org/danjac/flask-script - I'd like to do a 0.3 >> release by end of next week, so would like to check for compliance. > MANIFEST.in is missing, so the testsuite is not part of a source > release. The same is true for the docs, you also might want to add these. > > Check the Flask-Babel extension which I just updated. > > Also, would be cool if the README file would actually contain anything > that is related to the package. > > > Regards, > Armin >
I've included the MANIFEST.in and updated the README. On 23 July 2010 16:52, Dan Jacob <danjac354@gmail.com> wrote: > Thanks, wasn't quite clear on the requirement for MANIFEST.in. Maybe a > note about that and README should be in requirements checklist ? > > On 23 July 2010 16:48, Armin Ronacher <armin.ronacher@active-4.com> wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On 7/23/10 4:23 PM, Dan Jacob wrote: >>> Please take a look at the Flask-Script source >>> http://bitbucket.org/danjac/flask-script - I'd like to do a 0.3 >>> release by end of next week, so would like to check for compliance. >> MANIFEST.in is missing, so the testsuite is not part of a source >> release. The same is true for the docs, you also might want to add these. >> >> Check the Flask-Babel extension which I just updated. >> >> Also, would be cool if the README file would actually contain anything >> that is related to the package. >> >> >> Regards, >> Armin >> >
Hi,
On 7/23/10 6:06 PM, Dan Jacob wrote:
> I've included the MANIFEST.in and updated the README.
There is one problem though: nose tests does not integrate into the test
runner as expected. You will have to provide a Makefile that invokes
the testsuite as "setup.py test" does not do anything in Flask-Script.
Don't forget to also add the Makefile to the MANIFEST.in
Regars,
Armin
One solution is to provide a tox file in your source distribution which specifies exactly what is required. This is what I am doing in flask-creole to ensure that py.test is used. The extension-test-runner doesn't generate one if it already exists. On 25 July 2010 16:32, Armin Ronacher <armin.ronacher@active-4.com> wrote: > Hi, > > On 7/23/10 6:06 PM, Dan Jacob wrote: >> I've included the MANIFEST.in and updated the README. > There is one problem though: nose tests does not integrate into the test > runner as expected. You will have to provide a Makefile that invokes > the testsuite as "setup.py test" does not do anything in Flask-Script. > Don't forget to also add the Makefile to the MANIFEST.in > > > Regars, > Armin >
Hi, On 7/25/10 10:20 PM, Ali Afshar wrote: > One solution is to provide a tox file in your source distribution > which specifies exactly what is required. This is what I am doing in > flask-creole to ensure that py.test is used. The extension-test-runner > doesn't generate one if it already exists. A tox.ini is nice and handy, but I don't want to invoke tox in tox. So just make sure there is a Makefile that executes the testsuite :) py.test is installed by tox anyways, so that is fine. I will also make sure that nosetests is installed in the tox environments. Regards, Armin
> > > On 25 July 2010 16:32, Armin Ronacher <armin.ronacher@active-4.com> wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On 7/23/10 6:06 PM, Dan Jacob wrote: >>> I've included the MANIFEST.in and updated the README. >> There is one problem though: nose tests does not integrate into the test >> runner as expected. You will have to provide a Makefile that invokes >> the testsuite as "setup.py test" does not do anything in Flask-Script. >> Don't forget to also add the Makefile to the MANIFEST.in >> >> >> Regars, >> Armin >> I've been able to integrate nose using these options in my setup.py test_suite="nose.collector", tests_require=[ 'nose', ], --Dan
I am using nose tests for all my testing, as well, and this Makefile seems to work. If you agree, it might be good to add "If using nose, then you can use this Makefile for you tests:" to the docs. test: python setup.py nosetests (Also, on that subject: do you have to make sure nose itself is installed to run them, or is it assumed that you have nose installed when running 'make test'?) On 07/25/2010 11:32 AM, Armin Ronacher wrote: > Hi, > > On 7/23/10 6:06 PM, Dan Jacob wrote: >> I've included the MANIFEST.in and updated the README. > There is one problem though: nose tests does not integrate into the test > runner as expected. You will have to provide a Makefile that invokes > the testsuite as "setup.py test" does not do anything in Flask-Script. > Don't forget to also add the Makefile to the MANIFEST.in > > > Regars, > Armin -- Regards, Matthew "LeafStorm" Frazier http://leafstorm.us/
Hi, On 7/25/10 8:44 PM, LeafStorm wrote: > I am using nose tests for all my testing, as well, and this Makefile > seems to work. If you agree, it might be good to add "If using nose, > then you can use this Makefile for you tests:" to the docs. > > test: > python setup.py nosetests > > (Also, on that subject: do you have to make sure nose itself is > installed to run them, or is it assumed that you have nose installed > when running 'make test'?) tests_require=['host'] to the setup.py in that case. Regards, Armin
Odd, python setup.py test works absolutely fine on my machine. I'll look at adding a Makefile. On 25 July 2010 16:32, Armin Ronacher <armin.ronacher@active-4.com> wrote: > Hi, > > On 7/23/10 6:06 PM, Dan Jacob wrote: >> I've included the MANIFEST.in and updated the README. > There is one problem though: nose tests does not integrate into the test > runner as expected. You will have to provide a Makefile that invokes > the testsuite as "setup.py test" does not do anything in Flask-Script. > Don't forget to also add the Makefile to the MANIFEST.in > > > Regars, > Armin >
Hi,
On 7/25/10 5:35 PM, Dan Jacob wrote:
> Odd, python setup.py test works absolutely fine on my machine.
Actually, yes it does. My script was pulling in the lastest release
version which not yet has a testsuite.
The hg version works perfectly fine. I will approve it with the next
release.
Regards,
Armin
Great, thanks. I'll update my other extensions along the same guidelines and will put out new releases some time during the week. On 25 July 2010 17:10, Armin Ronacher <armin.ronacher@active-4.com> wrote: > Hi, > > On 7/25/10 5:35 PM, Dan Jacob wrote: >> Odd, python setup.py test works absolutely fine on my machine. > Actually, yes it does. My script was pulling in the lastest release > version which not yet has a testsuite. > > The hg version works perfectly fine. I will approve it with the next > release. > > > Regards, > Armin >
Slightly OT: what is the base version of Python extensions should work under ? 2.5 or 2.6 ? On 25 July 2010 16:35, Dan Jacob <danjac354@gmail.com> wrote: > Odd, python setup.py test works absolutely fine on my machine. > > I'll look at adding a Makefile. > > On 25 July 2010 16:32, Armin Ronacher <armin.ronacher@active-4.com> wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On 7/23/10 6:06 PM, Dan Jacob wrote: >>> I've included the MANIFEST.in and updated the README. >> There is one problem though: nose tests does not integrate into the test >> runner as expected. You will have to provide a Makefile that invokes >> the testsuite as "setup.py test" does not do anything in Flask-Script. >> Don't forget to also add the Makefile to the MANIFEST.in >> >> >> Regars, >> Armin >> >
Hi, On 7/25/10 5:36 PM, Dan Jacob wrote: > Slightly OT: what is the base version of Python extensions should work > under ? 2.5 or 2.6 ? 2.5 Regards, Armin