Skip to content

fix(tests/integration/__init__.py): Rename "TestCluster" to "IntegrationTestCluster" #1121

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.

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

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

Orenef11
Copy link
Contributor

PytestCollectionWarning: cannot collect test class 'TestCluster' because it has a __new__ constructor (from: tests/integration/standard/test_client_warnings.py)
  class TestCluster(object):

…ionTestCluster"

```
PytestCollectionWarning: cannot collect test class 'TestCluster' because it has a __new__ constructor (from: tests/integration/standard/test_client_warnings.py)
  class TestCluster(object):
```
@Orenef11
Copy link
Contributor Author

@absurdfarce
The goal is replace unittest to Pytest:

  1. Can I change all unittest marks and use Pytest?
  2. If not, can I change only the CI to run it with Pytest?

datasttax added a commit to datasttax/python-driver that referenced this pull request Jul 28, 2023
datasttax added a commit to datasttax/python-driver that referenced this pull request Jul 28, 2023
@absurdfarce
Copy link
Collaborator

absurdfarce commented Jul 12, 2024

Hey @Orenef11, apologies for the long delay... I'm trying to juggle way too many plates around here.

We're working on fully converting to pytest as part of the upcoming 3.30.0 release. The current work around that effort can be found in #1215; there's more detail in PYTHON-1297 as well. @bschoening pointed out that the issue discussed here should be addressed by this change in that PR. Once we get that merged feel free to double-check that assumption and let us know if we're wrong.

@absurdfarce
Copy link
Collaborator

Since this PR was originally opened we've completed the conversion to pytest and are using it regularly. I also believe the change referenced in my comment above does fix the issue being addressed here. As a result I'm going to close this out, but as always if anybody believes there's something we missed or an additional part of this PR we should (re)consider please open a new PR and let's talk about it.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants