- From: James Graham <jgraham@opera.com>
- Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2013 22:57:13 +0100 (CET)
- To: Tobie Langel <tobie@w3.org>
- cc: Robin Berjon <robin@w3.org>, Dirk Pranke <dpranke@chromium.org>, public-test-infra <public-test-infra@w3.org>
On Thu, 21 Mar 2013, Tobie Langel wrote: > On Thursday, March 21, 2013 at 9:19 PM, James Graham wrote: >> On Thu, 21 Mar 2013, Tobie Langel wrote: >>> Well, you can always fallback to writing custom code for this, can't you? >> >> Custom code where? It isn't clear from what you said that you were >> thinking of a server that can run custom code. But yes, I think my point >> is that the server has to be able to run custom code on a per-test basis >> to deal with the edge cases. >> > > I was thinking to have 80%-90% of the use cases met by a small set of simple tools (http headers, echo server, etc), and fallback to server-side code for whatever's left. > > Writing server-side code should be the exception, not the norm. Sure, I am all for simple things being simple as long as hard things are possible. I imagine the simple tools would in fact be built in the same way as the complex one-off things, but come built-in rather than written on a per-test basis.
Received on Thursday, 21 March 2013 21:57:44 UTC