Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

document setup/teardown mismatch in the unittest integration #2692

Closed
RonnyPfannschmidt opened this issue Aug 16, 2017 · 2 comments
Closed

document setup/teardown mismatch in the unittest integration #2692

RonnyPfannschmidt opened this issue Aug 16, 2017 · 2 comments
Labels
type: docs documentation improvement, missing or needing clarification

Comments

@RonnyPfannschmidt
Copy link
Member

follow-up to #2677

due to fundamental incompatibility we have to run certain details of unittest in the call phase instead of setup/teardown

this is surprising to users but necessary, unfortunately it is not documented
@nicoddemus nicoddemus added the type: docs documentation improvement, missing or needing clarification label Aug 16, 2017
OwenTuz added a commit to OwenTuz/pytest that referenced this issue Oct 21, 2017
@OwenTuz
pytest-dev#2692: Document setup/teardown behaviour when using unittes…
1fcca7b 
…t-based suites
OwenTuz added a commit to OwenTuz/pytest that referenced this issue Oct 21, 2017
@OwenTuz
pytest-dev#2692: Document setup/teardown behaviour when using unittes…
3cdbb18 
…t-based suites
@OwenTuz
Copy link
Contributor

OwenTuz commented Oct 21, 2017

First pass for this in #2859

I've just appended a note with a quick description: it could be moved to be nearer to (or linked from?) the mention of setup/teardown under 'unittest features' if you think it's worthwhile. Please let me know if you'd like any changes made.

@nicoddemus
Copy link
Member

Fixed by #2859

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
type: docs documentation improvement, missing or needing clarification
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
3 participants
@RonnyPfannschmidt @nicoddemus @OwenTuz