- From: Simon Fraser <smfr@me.com>
- Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2010 08:56:12 -0700
- To: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>
- Cc: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, Peter Linss <peter.linss@hp.com>, John Jansen <John.Jansen@microsoft.com>, "public-css-testsuite@w3.org" <public-css-testsuite@w3.org>
On Oct 28, 2010, at 8:47 AM, Boris Zbarsky wrote: > On 10/28/10 11:37 AM, Simon Fraser wrote: >> What I recall from CSS-WG minutes is that the implementation report can be generated with a public beta or nightly build, but that build has to have been available to the public for a minimum of one month. > > I have to be missing something. If I push a change to Gecko, we generate a nightly with that change, we discover the change breaks sites and I back it out, then I wait a month I can use that known-broken build to generate an implementation report? No; there's an implicit condition that you can't rig the results in this way. The tests should continue to pass in more recent betas or a public release derived from the beta you tested with. > I can _almost_ see the point of allowing betas, since that allows us to try to generate implementation reports now that will hopefully match shipping browsers by the time the test suite is stabilized. Even that's a bit fishy, given the amount of churn I've seen between beta and final. But the nightly thing just doesn't make any sense, unless I'm missing something.... In <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2010Oct/0008.html> it was minuted that Peter said that nightlies were OK as long as they have been available for a month. I think this was in response to Opera and WebKit stating that they didn't do betas; nightlies was all they had. Simon
Received on Thursday, 28 October 2010 15:57:00 UTC