- From: Chinmay Pendharkar <notthetup@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2015 13:45:48 +0800
- To: Ryoya KAWAI <ryoya.kawai@gmail.com>
- Cc: Matthew Paradis <matthew.paradis@bbc.co.uk>, Joe Berkovitz <joe@noteflight.com>, Raymond Toy <rtoy@google.com>, Chris Lowis <chris.lowis@gmail.com>, Paul Adenot <padenot@mozilla.com>, Audio Working Group <public-audio@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAJw8Xio62GtBww7dcL2XJdUZ_+O50VJT0GEHAvJKWom8QWMeGA@mail.gmail.com>
Hi Joe and all, Sonoport was also keen on helping out with this effort. Unfortunately we couldn't get a suitable intern this summer to work on this. However, I would be interested in contributing to some extent. I did spend a little time looking through the various test suites (WebPlatform tests, Browser Vendor tests, and the web-audio-test-api library). I had been planning for the following initial tasks. - Clean up IDL based WebPlatform tests - Add tests for all the other Nodes - Try to integrate tests from Various Browser platforms - Explore CI based automated testing I propose this could be done collaboratively on Github, so individual issues could be taken on by various people who're willing to contribute to this. -Chinmay On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 6:12 PM, Ryoya KAWAI <ryoya.kawai@gmail.com> wrote: > He, @mohayonao, is one of the Japanese developer who builds great Web > Audio applications. He might in this list, but I can ask him to help. > > -- > Ryoya KAWAI : ryoya.kawai@gmail.com > > > On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 6:59 PM, Matthew Paradis > <matthew.paradis@bbc.co.uk> wrote: > > As mentioned by Paul at the F2F there is also a test suite in progress > here > > > > https://github.com/mohayonao/web-audio-test-api/ > > > > Matt > > > > -- > > Matthew Paradis > > Senior Software Engineer (Audio), > > BBC Research & Development > > 030304 09889 | matthew.paradis@bbc.co.uk | www.bbc.co.uk/rd/sound > > > > From: Joe Berkovitz <joe@noteflight.com> > > Date: Monday, 8 June 2015 22:06 > > To: Raymond Toy <rtoy@google.com> > > Cc: Chris Lowis <chris.lowis@gmail.com>, Paul Adenot < > padenot@mozilla.com>, > > Audio Working Group <public-audio@w3.org> > > Subject: Re: Calling All Tests > > Resent-From: <public-audio@w3.org> > > Resent-Date: Monday, 8 June 2015 22:06 > > > >> > >> However, I was more concerned about the reverse. We have the WPT repo, > so > >> how do I get that into Chrome's testing infrastructure without > modifying any > >> test in the WPT repo? Without this, blink won't find any utility in the > repo > >> and will probably just continue to use it's existing test suite. Sadly. > > > > > > I think that's an internal problem for browser vendors -- but assuming > there > > is some suitably easy way to invoke a WPT suite and extract a result from > > it, then it shouldnt be hard. > > > > If for some reason the WPT cannot be run that way, then I will be ready > to > > argue that we should use some framework that is easy for vendors to > include > > in their standard CI testing. > > > > > >> > >> I assume that despite the failures you can still call yourself an > >> implementation of WebAudio that purports to conform. > > > > > > I guess that's how the world works, unfortunately. But if there is an > agreed > > suite, it will at least get harder, and app developers are more likely to > > call out implementations on these points: they can run the tests too. > > > >> > >> My assumption here was that, say, FF found a bug in their implementation > >> and want a test for that and pushes that to the repo. Which then causes > >> Chrome to fail that test (for whatever reason). We wouldn't want to > block > >> FF from having a regression test, but we wouldn't want to be blocked > from > >> updating because the test will cause failures in our test bots. > > > > > > Perhaps we need a way to gate tests in the suite so that you are able to > > arbitrarily exclude ones that are not applicable for some reason (or > > arbitrarily include the ones you want). > > > >> I won't have time to do this myself in the near future, but I would like > >> to pull a few tests over from the WPT repo and run them to see how they > >> would work in Chrome. Perhaps everything will work just fine. > > > > > > Thanks -- It'd be great to understand this landscape better. > > > > ...Joe > > > > > > > > ---------------------------- > > > > http://www.bbc.co.uk > > This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and may contain > personal > > views which are not the views of the BBC unless specifically stated. > > If you have received it in error, please delete it from your system. > > Do not use, copy or disclose the information in any way nor act in > reliance > > on it and notify the sender immediately. > > Please note that the BBC monitors e-mails sent or received. > > Further communication will signify your consent to this. > > > > --------------------- > >
Received on Wednesday, 10 June 2015 05:46:47 UTC