This issue tracker has been migrated to GitHub, and is currently read-only.
For more information, see the GitHub FAQs in the Python's Developer Guide.

Author carljm
Recipients berker.peksag, bignose, brett.cannon, carljm, fov, kevinbenton, kushal.das, michael.foord, poke, rbcollins, ztane
Date 2015-07-22.17:50:08
SpamBayes Score -1.0
Marked as misclassified Yes
Message-id <1437587408.72.0.0108273323991.issue24651@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
In-reply-to
Content
FWIW, my assumption was that the typical usage pattern would be `import mock` rather than separate imports of all the assertions, so I don't think there'd really be an increase in what users need to know about or import. (They already need to know about the methods on the mock object, knowing about functions in a module isn't practically any different.)

But the "breaking working code for insufficient benefit" argument is strong indeed, and personally I'm happy to defer to the module author on this one.

Thanks for writing and maintaining mock!
History
Date User Action Args
2015-07-22 17:50:08carljmsetrecipients: + carljm, brett.cannon, rbcollins, michael.foord, poke, bignose, berker.peksag, kushal.das, ztane, fov, kevinbenton
2015-07-22 17:50:08carljmsetmessageid: <1437587408.72.0.0108273323991.issue24651@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
2015-07-22 17:50:08carljmlinkissue24651 messages
2015-07-22 17:50:08carljmcreate