- From: James Graham <james@hoppipolla.co.uk>
- Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2014 11:11:38 +0000
- To: public-test-infra@w3.org
On 21/03/14 11:03, Robin Berjon wrote: > • The implementation report. That might be a bit trickier because I > understand why you'd want to reference files, just as I understand why a > year later someone might need to move those files around. I'm not sure > how to handle this. The simplest option if for IRs to have a warning at > the top stating that they were built from WPT commit deadb33f and links > might go stale — whoever wishes to reproduce the same situation can do > so by checking out the repo and reverting to that commit. There are > other options but they're pretty heavy-handed so I'd rather not mention > them yet. > Yes, I think implementation reports should specify which version of the testsuite they used. I don't think that linking to the most recent version of the tests on w3c-test.org is appropriate; if you want to precisely recreate an implementation report you should check out the files and do it locally. I consider w3c-test to be a convenient service to remove overhead of casually running tests, not the source of all truth, so I don't think we should complicate it to make unusual use cases easier.
Received on Friday, 21 March 2014 11:12:23 UTC