Re: Proposal to refactor the CSS test repo

From: Tobie Langel <tobie.langel@gmail.com<mailto:tobie.langel@gmail.com>>
Date: Wednesday, April 23, 2014 at 3:36 PM
To: Rebecca Hauck <rhauck@adobe.com<mailto:rhauck@adobe.com>>
Cc: Peter Linss <peter.linss@hp.com<mailto:peter.linss@hp.com>>, "public-css-testsuite@w3.org<mailto:public-css-testsuite@w3.org>" <public-css-testsuite@w3.org<mailto:public-css-testsuite@w3.org>>
Subject: Re: Proposal to refactor the CSS test repo

On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 6:57 PM, Rebecca Hauck <rhauck@adobe.com<mailto:rhauck@adobe.com>> wrote:

[...]

> I propose refactor the directories to use the spec short names just as the
> spec repo does.

This is a great move. Thanks for driving this.

[...]

> The proposed new structure:
>
> tests/[spec-shortname, spec-shortname...]
> test-plans/[spec-shortname, spec-shortname...]
> tools

May I suggest instead to adopt the same format already used in the WPT repository, with shortnames at the root (eventually containing a test plan within each directory).

Good suggestion. We can go with that.


> Also in full disclosure, I'm proposing this now as a precursor to another
> proposal I'd like to make to get the CSS repo more integrated (as a submodule)
> of the WPT repo.  Since that is an entirely different different discussion,
> I'll reserve that for a different thread/list, but I think getting our stuff
> well organized must come first.

Suggest you'd bring that up on public-test-infra@ asap.

Yes, that's what I'm planning, but I'd rather not tangle that conversation with this one.  I only wanted to give some context for this proposal.



All tooling built around WPT assumes specs are at the root of the directory, using their shortnames. So including the CSS repo as a submodule won't help you much here, unless you fix both open-source tools AND lobby implementors to fix theirs (WPT is well on track to be part of most if not all browser vendors CI environments in the near future).

Ok, these are details to be worked through in that separate thread.  It would be great if I/we all had an understanding of where and how WPT is being used now and what these future plans are so we understand the technical issues. Is the status of this public somewhere?


Why not simply merge with the WPT repo? What technical issues prevent this?

Best,

--tobie