Re: Towards a better testsuite: Build System

On Apr 8, 2016 19:01, "fantasai" <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net> wrote:
> However, individual vendors may need scripts to convert the
> test-reference linkages into their preferred format E.g.
> for Mozilla, we do need to generate reftest manifest files,
> which are currently constructed by the build system. But
> that can be done with a lighter-weight system that just
> generates manifests in place per directory.

We don't, actually. We already run reftests from wpt using its manifest
format; there's no reason to use reftest.list.

> (As for adopting a "filename convention" for mapping the
> tests and references... No. There are thousands of CSS tests
> that use the same reference file. Whoever wants a "filename
> convention" can make 1000 copies of each common reference if
> they want, but I refuse to support such nonsense in the CSSWG
> repository.)

Where did anybody suggest that? Wpt uses a filename convention to mark
manual tests, but not for reftests.

Ms2ger