One or more of the following people are relevant to this code:

• @Qiskit/terra-core

On the basis of #13776 (comment), are Python-interacting tests still something we want to pursue?

Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 14391803253

Details

• 0 of 0 changed or added relevant lines in 0 files are covered.
• 15 unchanged lines in 2 files lost coverage.
• Overall coverage decreased (-0.006%) to 88.237%

Totals
Change from base Build 14389768512:	-0.006%
Covered Lines:	73727
Relevant Lines:	83556

💛 - Coveralls

On the basis of #13776 (comment), are Python-interacting tests still something we want to pursue?

From what I could find, I believe there might still be a use case for it, in which our Python interaction should not involved extracting any PyO3 based structures. For the case of PackedOperation and an operation from Python, there's no extractions involved. But we do still need Python to test that whatever we're doing is working as expected. For more information check out the discussion we had over here.

It is possible to write tests using it, but is that necessarily the best strategy? There's a lot of infrastructure that we need to have to support this, and it's not clear to me why Python needs to be involved in that test. For a small-scale unit test, can we leave it at testing the correctness of the backing Rust object (right before extraction to Python) rather than importing Qiskit from Python space?