[PEAK] Conflict between PEAK and coverage.py

[Bobby Impollonia]

On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 3:18 PM, P.J. Eby <pje at telecommunity.com> wrote:
> At 02:13 PM 3/22/2011 -0700, Bobby Impollonia wrote:
>>
>> It works correctly with --timid. It's somewhat inconvenient because it
>> makes the tests run several times slower and nose's coverage plugin
>> doesn't expose that option.
>
> If you can get the coverage developers to tell me what DecoratorTools is
> doing wrong, exactly, I can try to fix it.

I added a coverage bug to track the issue and maybe get some eyes on
it from that side:
https://bitbucket.org/ned/coveragepy/issue/125/coverage-removes-decoratortoolss-tracing