- From: Robin Berjon <robin@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 07 Feb 2013 13:13:59 +0100
- To: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>
- CC: Kris Krueger <krisk@microsoft.com>, "'public-html-testsuite@w3.org'" <public-html-testsuite@w3.org>
On 07/02/2013 13:08 , Arthur Barstow wrote: > On 2/7/13 3:55 AM, ext Robin Berjon wrote: >> Another option is to capture that in file names (if there's ".manual." >> in the file name, then it's manual). > > (I kinda prefer Jame's suggestion to use an appropriately named > directory for manual tests but I'm mostly indifferent.) The problem with using a specific directory is that we then lose the mapping from the test to the specification section (an important piece of information that we're using to assess coverage). >> Finally, we don't need metadata to mark a test as approved. Anything >> that's in the suite is approved since submissions are in pull requests. > > One issue we have with at least one of WebApps' test suites is knowing > if an approved test is for a specific dated version of the spec or the > ED. How do you handle that in GH. The way we're handling that is that we have the master branch for "latest whatever" (ED) and a CR branch that maps to the latest snapshot. I *think* it would be a bad idea to complexify this to the point where we might need to map to multiple previous snapshots so I reckon in your case you can do the same and use CR for snapshots (even if they aren't in CR). -- Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/ - @robinberjon
Received on Thursday, 7 February 2013 12:14:10 UTC