Re: Web Platform Tests Pull Request Commenting

Just a note to say that the text description of the data model I promised
last week is now in the document
for your perusal. Writing it up exposed a couple of bugs that I have
resolved in the data model diagram..

On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 11:48 AM, Bob Holt <> wrote:

> Since my email yesterday, I've been working on the data model required to
> do everything we would want in the PR dashboard (building on one James
> began). I have added it to the bottom of the specification document
> <>.
> I will write up a text description explaining the reasoning behind the
> entities and their relationships, but I will say that in looking at the
> potential complexity here, it looks more and more like a standalone
> application.
> On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 9:58 AM, James Graham <>
> wrote:
>> On 16/05/17 19:19, Jeff Carpenter wrote:
>>> I certainly don't want to step on any toes here, but I wanted to throw
>>> my opinion out there since I see possible opportunities for saving time
>>> and effort. From my perspective it looks like the project I'm working
>>> on, WPT Dashboard, and this project have very similar aims:
>>> - WPT Results Consolidator: Collect and display WPT results
>>> - WPT Dashboard: Run, collect and display WPT results
>> So, I think that's a simplification of the situation.
>> The stability dashboard will need to show multiple runs for a specific
>> test. It will only need to deal with one PR's worth of tests vs the
>> hundreds of thousands of tests in the entire repository, which vastly
>> changes the kind of visualization options that are required. It will need
>> to show additional information like where the PR is synced on
>> It will need to draw attention to anything that blocks the
>> PR from landing, but won't necessarily need features like search that are
>> required to work with the full set of results.
>> I definitely see the appeal of sharing code where it makes sense, but I
>> wonder if in this case it won't be more effort to try and make one tool
>> that does everything well vs two tools that do a specific thing well. I
>> think I would need to see a concrete proposal for how we could build a
>> single tool here to judge better whether the tradeoffs are worth it.

Received on Tuesday, 23 May 2017 16:25:44 UTC