[Product-Developers] Thinking about CMF site fixture/layer for plone.testing

David Glick davidglick at groundwire.org
Sat May 12 17:45:27 UTC 2012

On 5/10/12 9:24 AM, Sean Upton wrote:
> I'm using a homegrown CMF site fixture/layer with plone.testing for
> testing add-ons that require CMF but not Plone (and possibly also are
> non-GPL e.g. MIT/BSD/ZPL type licenses).  What I have done thus far is
> minimal -- just the tiny bits I need to test: create a site class
> subclassing Products.CMFCore.PortalObject.PoralObjectBase, and add a
> portal_catalog to that site, and this runs inside a layer based on
> plone.testing.z2.STARTUP.
> This seems useful to me because it gives me a way of resolving items
> in a site via a catalog, and it gives me a persistent component
> registry to test against.  It also is much faster to set up and tear
> down than a fully-blown Plone site, which is advantageous for packages
> that have minimal coupling with Plone.
> Is this something that might (eventually) be useful to others as an
> added layer in plone.testing itself (assuming another optional extra
> called 'cmf', and a layer resource called 'site')?
Why not 'portal', since that's what's used in the Plone fixture, 
CMFTestCase, and PortalTestCase in Zope2's Testing package?
> If so, what OOTB CMF tools and fixtures would you want in a CMF site
> fixture for testing?
> Also, is there any point in using / requiring CMFDefault if a fixture
> based on CMFCore will suffice?  My goal would be only adding extra
> dependency on CMFCore only.
+1 for not requiring CMFDefault, and for the proposal in general.


David Glick
 Web Developer
 davidglick at groundwire.org

Are you engaging? Find out! Use our free engagement benchmarking tool.


More information about the Product-Developers mailing list