W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-css-testsuite@w3.org > June 2014

Re: CSS test repo refactored - branch ready for review

From: Gérard Talbot <css21testsuite@gtalbot.org>
Date: Tue, 03 Jun 2014 20:27:05 -0400
To: Rebecca Hauck <rhauck@adobe.com>
Cc: Peter Linss <peter.linss@hp.com>, public-css-testsuite@w3.org
Message-ID: <88d3b5931f6f09acc3baeda39327ca9c@gtalbot.org>
Le 2014-06-03 20:11, Rebecca Hauck a écrit :
> Hey Gérard,
> 
> To address your concerns, I reorganized css21 and moved all the files 
> that
> were at the root into section subdirectories.

Rebecca,

I've been doing just that since early this afternoon, with Mercurial !!


> I did this in my forked
> repo on Github so you could easily review it there before pushing it 
> [1].
> (Note: If/when I do land these changes, they’ll be pushed directly to
> Mercurial rather then merged from Github).
> 
> The commit with all the files moved is here [2]. If you’d like to clone
> this repo and browse it locally, you’ll have to clone the 
> ‘organize-css21'
> branch:
> 
> git clone -b organize-css21 git@github.com:rhauck/csswg-test.git
> 
> 
> Or, if you do not have a public key set up:
> 
> git clone -b organize-css21 https://github.com/rhauck/csswg-test.git
> 
> 
> 
> Let me know if this looks better to you and if you have any other
> suggestions. It’s fairly straightforward to make changes.

I have no idea what's going on right now. I'm very much confused now. :(

Gérard

> 
> Also, I added the script I used to check that no paths to reference or
> support files were broken [3].  I’ll add this to the main repo when I 
> land
> these changes.
> 
> Cheers,
> -Rebecca
> 
> 
> [1] https://github.com/rhauck/csswg-test/tree/organize-css21
> [2]
> https://github.com/rhauck/csswg-test/commit/911ca986fe57ce43075cae6b05d11a1
> 9c55118fb
> [3]
> https://github.com/rhauck/csswg-test/blob/organize-css21/tools/path_checker
> .py
> 
> On 6/2/14, 8:04 PM, "Gérard Talbot" <css21testsuite@gtalbot.org> wrote:
> 
>> Le 2014-06-02 21:41, Rebecca Hauck a écrit :
>>> Hi Gérard,
>>> 
>>> [Š]
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> All the locations of files within the repository are maintained by
>>>>> people (you really don't want an automated process modifying the
>>>>> repository).
>>>> 
>>>> Forgive my question but ... where are *all of my submitted tests* 
>>>> now
>>>> ?
>>>> in my local repository? and in http://test.csswg.org/source/ ?
>>>> 
>>>> I ask this because ...
>>>> There used to be a /contributors folder (which was in the /src/
>>>> folder)
>>>> where all contributors had their folder by their username. Now, such
>>>> /contributors folder is only visible, only accessible via mercurial
>>>> and
>>>> has only a few folders.
>>>> I can see right now an
>>>> /contributors/gtalbot/submitted
>>>> but it is empty and this folder is not viewable, not accessible from
>>>> http://test.csswg.org/source/
>>> 
>>> 
>>> We are no longer keeping submitted tests in folders by user or 
>>> company
>>> name. We still have a place for work-in-progress that has 
>>> user/company
>>> folders under it, but this is really to support the legacy process 
>>> when
>>> people were pushing directly to Mercurial.
>> 
>> I still use Mercurial.
>> 
>>> Those files needed to be parked
>>> somewhere and I chose the name 'work-in-progress' because it was more
>>> descriptive than Œincoming¹. We now no longer need special 
>>> instructions
>>> or
>>> specific directory names to submit a test. It¹s very simple - if 
>>> you¹re
>>> submitting tests for the Backgrounds & Borders spec (for example), 
>>> your
>>> test goes in the css-backgrounds-3 directory. This makes it very easy
>>> to
>>> find all of the tests for a given spec in one place rather than being
>>> spread across multiple user/company folders.
>> 
>> Understandable.
>> 
>>> It will also make it easier
>>> for vendors to import tests for any given spec or set of specs
>>> (automated
>>> or otherwise) as it eliminates the need to parse the test files to
>>> figure
>>> out what specs they¹re testing. Implementors really want to access
>>> tests
>>> by specs and not by who authored them (although we can rely on the
>>> metadata for that if needed).
>> 
>> Understandable.
>> 
>>> If you still have contributors folder locally, you likely have some
>>> hidden
>>> dot files that prevented it from being removed when you updated your
>>> local
>>> repo.
>> 
>> Yes. After checking the viewing (display) of hidden files, I see 
>> hidden
>> .directory files in all folders of /contributors/gtalbot/
>> 
>>> It happened to me as well with those pesky .DS_Store files.
>> 
>> .DS_Store files are MacOSX-related, I believe.
>> 
>>> What
>>> you see in the web interface at http://test.csswg.org/source/ is
>>> accurate
>>> and you can safely delete your local contributors folder.
>>> 
>>> And of course as you know, you can always query all of the tests you
>>> authored via Shepherd or grep locally if you wish. Your tests were
>>> across
>>> multiple specs so they got filed under the appropriate spec
>>> directories.
>> 
>> Some of my tests were accross multiple specs. Others were not. In any
>> case, ~= 260 of my tests were not moved into appropriate spec
>> directories.
>> 
>> Eg
>> 
>> http://test.csswg.org/source/css21/background-position-applies-to-001a.xht
>> 
>> is not in
>> 
>> http://test.csswg.org/source/css21/backgrounds/
>> 
>> ... where I think it should be instead.
>> 
>> 
>>> If you want the complete list of where everything went, the HG
>>> changeset
>>> is here [1], but the Github interface actually gives you a little 
>>> nicer
>>> view of the the renaming [2]. Everything you had in
>>> /contributors/gtalbot/incoming moved to /work-in-progress/gtalbot 
>>> [3].
>>> The
>>> full description of the changes that were made are at the top of this
>>> thread [4].
>>> 
>>> On somewhat of a side note, since we¹re now in the Github world, any
>>> new
>>> tests that land in the repo should start with a pull request where 
>>> they
>>> will be reviewed, approved, and merged from there. We are favoring 
>>> this
>>> over using the mailing list for test reviews for reasons I outlined
>>> here
>>> [5].
>> 
>> 
>> I'm sorry. I am still outdated then.
>> 
>> 
>>> All W3C test submissions are now done this way and it¹s a much
>>> cleaner approach than relying on an external system or directory 
>>> naming
>>> convention to reflect test status.  There are still a few who push
>>> directly to Mercurial, but we are not broadcasting this workflow any
>>> longer and and even the veterans are discouraged from doing this if
>>> what
>>> they¹re submitting needs review. I personally only do so for
>>> housekeeping
>>> tasks that don¹t require a review. With this new workflow, all tests
>>> that
>>> are merged into the repo can be assumed reviewed and approved.
>>> 
>>> Now, I realize that we still have many tests unreviewed from before 
>>> we
>>> adopted Github. We can still use Shepherd for tracking these-- either
>>> its
>>> API or the web interface. However, at some point, we¹ll have to 
>>> decide
>>> how
>>> to reconcile these tests as it¹s probably not realistic to expect 
>>> that
>>> thousands of tests will ever be reviewed by humans. Peter and I have
>>> had
>>> some offline discussions about how to address this, but this is a 
>>> issue
>>> to
>>> solve later.
>> 
>> I have ideas on this.
>> 
>>> We have Shepherd in the meantime (luckily). We wanted to make
>>> these changes first to move closer to the way the rest of the W3C
>>> manages
>>> tests. We¹re now in a better position to merge/move into the main W3C
>>> web-platform-tests repo [6]. That¹s also a separate discussion that
>>> only
>>> just began at the last CSSWG F2F and it will certainly pick up again
>>> soon.
>>>  We just had to do this part first.
>>> 
>>> Let me know if you have any other questions & thanks again for your
>>> incredible attention to detail. :)
>> 
>> :)
>> 
>> Gérard
>> 
>>> Cheers,
>>> -Rebecca
>>> 
>>> 
>>> [1] http://hg.csswg.org/test/rev/8ed45b2c892f
>>> [2]
>>> 
>>> https://github.com/w3c/csswg-test/commit/70cfca08acf7fdb1119eb2e7ecbccd91
>>> 15
>>> cd81c7
>>> [3]
>>> 
>>> https://github.com/w3c/csswg-test/commit/55ecf8c9c7bfcb67d059ea68dc8041d8
>>> a8
>>> 0cdf7f
>>> [4]
>>> 
>>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-css-testsuite/2014May/0000.htm
>>> l
>>> [5]
>>> 
>>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-css-testsuite/2013Nov/0014.htm
>>> l
>>> [6] https://github.com/w3c/web-platform-tests
>> 
>> --
>> Web authors' contributions to CSS 2.1 test suite
>> http://www.gtalbot.org/BrowserBugsSection/css21testsuite/web-authors-contr
>> ibutions-css21-testsuite.html
>> CSS 2.1 Test suite RC6, March 23rd 2011
>> http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/20110323/html4/toc.html

-- 
Web authors' contributions to CSS 2.1 test suite
http://www.gtalbot.org/BrowserBugsSection/css21testsuite/web-authors-contributions-css21-testsuite.html
CSS 2.1 Test suite RC6, March 23rd 2011
http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/20110323/html4/toc.html
Received on Wednesday, 4 June 2014 00:27:45 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 20 January 2023 19:58:20 UTC