Following up on "when automerging of tests goes awry <https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-test-infra/2017JanMar/thread.html#msg25>" and "Dealing with prove-it-then-spec-it situations in web-platform-tests <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msg/blink-dev/LDc3RgrrldU/a1Gn0ld9EQAJ>" (and CCing various folks who were involved in those conversations). Based on those conversations, it sounds like there's something approaching consensus that it would be good to support "tentative" tests in WPT that run ahead of the relevant specification. This allows us to gather implementation experience to inform our decisions about the "right" answer to spec questions, and allows us to share that experience easily with each other. In order to ensure that we're on the same page about the status of these tests, I'd propose that when uploading tentative tests, developers choose one of the following identification mechanisms: 1. Put the tests in a new file with a `-tentative.*` suffix (e.g. `//content-security-policy/script-src/new-test-tentative.sub.html`). 2. Put the tests in a `tentative` subdirectory of an existing suite (e.g. `//content-security-policy/tentative/new-script-src-test.sub.html`). These both seem fairly unambiguous, and I see good use-cases for each. WDYT? -mikeReceived on Tuesday, 23 May 2017 13:11:22 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:34:13 UTC