Questions after testtools merge

[Vincent Ladeuil]

>>>>> "jam" == John Arbash Meinel <john at arbash-meinel.com> writes:

<snip/>

    jam> So I'm pretty sure that always calling tearDown *was* something that we
    jam> had to explicitly put into our .run() method. And it certainly could
    jam> have been lost in the transition.

I'd be surprised if that was the case but if it's verified it's indeed a
very serious bug. 

I'm surprised that no test catches that though...

    jam> That said, we've moved to the 'addCleanup()' style of teardown,
    jam> so we could just switch those failing tests over to the new way
    jam> of doing things.

cleanups are called during tearDown so that should not address the
problem :-/

        Vincent