hi I think it makes my test lot easier to have 'bzr rm ...' syntax. and i did previously converted them to lists, but Jonk and I talked about magic previously on the list and he was sort of okay with it if it makes the tests easier and clearer. so I was sort of hoping of just moving this to my test for now and moving it back to __init__ after some discussion an hopefully consensus. but if converting it again is what it takes, then I can do it. thanks for all the reviews marius ps. I am away this weekend and think I'll be able to manage one more bundle today <div>On 4/20/07, Martin Pool <<a href="mailto:mbp@sourcefrog.net">mbp@sourcefrog.net</a>> wrote:<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"> On 4/20/07, Marius Kruger <<a href="mailto:amanic@gmail.com">amanic@gmail.com</a>> wrote: > hi, > I have addressed the issues raised on the list, in the way I replied to the > mails. > > please find attached the updated bundle and a diff since the previous bundle > if you'd like to see how I tried to fix things. Thanks for the incremental diff, that makes it a lot easier.  I really want to get this in the next release, and appreciate you redrafting it so many times. @@ -31,6 +31,16 @@ class TestRemove(ExternalBase): +    def run_bzr_captured(self, argv, retcode=0, encoding=None, stdin=None, +                         working_dir=None): + +        # magically convert commands like 'remove abc' to ['remove', 'abc'] +        if (isinstance(argv, tuple) and len(argv) == 1 and +            isinstance(argv[0], basestring)): +            argv = shlex.split(argv[0]) +        return ExternalBase.run_bzr_captured(self, argv, retcode, encoding, +            stdin, working_dir) +      def _make_add_and_assert_tree(self, files):          tree = self.make_branch_and_tree('.')          self.build_tree(files) I don't think this really addresses the gist of John's comments, and it might be confusing that run_bzr_captured works differently in this class to elsewhere.  So I think it would be better to actually change all the calls in these tests to just pass the arguments as individual strings, which should be a pretty mechanical change.  I'll keep an eye out tomorrow and hopefully we can then merge it. -- Martin </blockquote></div> -- I don't trust a Revision Control System with less than 5900 unit tests.