Frank Tobia
Frank Tobia
Calling the marker `order` sounds like a good idea.
I've updated the title to describe the proposal. I think a single marker name that takes parameters is a good idea -- though I'm interested to hear feedback from folks...
Do you mean that test order isn't preserved if you run your tests with multiple CPUs? I think that this limitation could be overcome in theory, though I'm not sure...
Sorry I let this go so long. I'll merge soon and hopefully do a release this weekend.
I'm sorry to have upset you. In my defense, the note at the top of the page tries to warn of this: "Notably, some of this documentation may be aspirational...
I think I like this better: ``` @pytest.mark.run(before='test_foo') def test_bar(): assert True ``` It's more declarative and it means pytest-ordering can register a single marker that does all the work.
Call this marker "order" instead of "run" per #38
This sounds sane and pretty straightforward. Any marker that ends in one or more digits will be considered orderable. It will create a group that is the marker's name minus...
This definitely looks like a bug. Probably a few bugs. Try starting the order from 0. It looks like there are problems when the "order" ordinal is higher than the...
Hm, I'm (finally) getting around to take a look at this. I have it failing for me locally, here's the captured stderr call ``` tests/test_xdist_handling.py:62: AssertionError ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Captured stderr call...