W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-test-infra@w3.org > July to September 2012

Re: W3C Testing How To slides

From: James Graham <jgraham@opera.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2012 19:17:18 +0200 (CEST)
To: Rebecca Hauck <rhauck@adobe.com>
cc: Tobie Langel <tobie@fb.com>, Kris Krueger <krisk@microsoft.com>, Odin HÝrthe Omdal <odinho@opera.com>, "public-test-infra@w3.org" <public-test-infra@w3.org>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1209191912500.8106@sirius>
On Wed, 19 Sep 2012, Rebecca Hauck wrote:

> BTW, I nominated this topic as a session idea on the Plenary day at TPAC
> next month.
> http://www.w3.org/wiki/TPAC2012/SessionIdeas#Moving_W3C_repositories_to_git

I see that's listed as a session for someone else to organise/lead. If no 
one else wants I am quite happy to run such a session.

> On 9/19/12 9:33 AM, "Tobie Langel" <tobie@fb.com> wrote:
>> On 9/19/12 6:27 PM, "Kris Krueger" <krisk@microsoft.com> wrote:
>>> I believe it's a lot of extra work without a lot of benefit.
>> I guess that depends whether we're planning to rely on the developer
>> community to significantly help with test authoring... or not.

Indeed this is a factor; github gets lots of exposure so we are much more 
likely to get test contributions from authors encountering bugs in their 
day-to-day work if we have a presence there. It is pretty annoying to get 
to the stage of making a pull request only to be told "do some midly 
compelex magic to format the patch for hg, then apply it to a different 
repository". Indeed I would expect most people to give up at that point.

FWIW I strongly doubt that authors will ever be providing the majority of 
testsby number or anything. But their tests are valuable because they come 
from actual problems they have experienced. So I really don't think it is 
wise to operate in our own ghetto.
Received on Wednesday, 19 September 2012 17:18:01 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:34:08 UTC