- From: Tobie Langel <tobie@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2013 23:01:36 +0100
- To: James Graham <jgraham@opera.com>
- Cc: Robin Berjon <robin@w3.org>, Dirk Pranke <dpranke@chromium.org>, public-test-infra <public-test-infra@w3.org>
On Thursday, March 21, 2013 at 10:57 PM, James Graham wrote: > 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. Yup. --tobie
Received on Thursday, 21 March 2013 22:01:44 UTC