W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-test-infra@w3.org > April to June 2012

Re: Repository layout

From: Linss, Peter <peter.linss@hp.com>
Date: Fri, 1 Jun 2012 13:29:57 +0000
To: James Graham <jgraham@opera.com>
CC: "<public-test-infra@w3.org>" <public-test-infra@w3.org>
Message-ID: <39546F0D-51F6-4670-9932-C162587B0299@hp.com>

On Jun 1, 2012, at 5:22 AM, James Graham wrote:

> On 06/01/2012 02:01 PM, Robin Berjon wrote:
>> On May 31, 2012, at 16:15 , James Graham wrote:
>>>> Overall I agree that the approval step is a bureaucratic speed bump
>>>> that is not being helpful. I think that we should move to a
>>>> commit-then-review model in which people who have an interest in
>>>> passing a test suite can file bugs against broken tests. Ideally, we
>>>> would make flagging broken tests easy  I'm thinking about ways of
>>>> doing that in the framework (suggestions welcome  I wonder if I
>>>> could just add a flag to "reported as broken" test cases).
>>> 
>>> Make it possible to link to bug reports?
>> 
>> Are you thinking of something like<link rel='bug' href='URL of bug report'>? I think that would work for me.
>> 
> 
> I meant in the metadata. I don't see why you would want to link to a bug about a test inside a test, really.

Agreed, you don't want to churn the test unnecessarily. Although the term 'in the metadata' is a bit vague, as some of the metadata about a test _is_stored in the test.

Peter
Received on Friday, 1 June 2012 13:31:06 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 1 June 2012 13:31:07 GMT