Re: Tentative tests.

On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 6:17 PM, Ojan Vafai <> wrote:

> On Tue, May 23, 2017, 11:40 AM Mike West <> wrote:
>> On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 5:14 PM, Anne van Kesteren <>
>> wrote:
>>> On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 3:10 PM, Mike West <> wrote:
>>> > 1.  Put the tests in a new file with a `-tentative.*` suffix (e.g.
>>> > `//content-security-policy/script-src/new-test-tentative.sub.html`).
>>> This doesn't mix with -manual. Not sure if that's a problem, but
>>> dot-delimiting might also be okay?
>> Sure. `.tentative.*` is fine by me.
>>> > 2.  Put the tests in a `tentative` subdirectory of an existing suite
>>> (e.g.
>>> > `//content-security-policy/tentative/new-script-src-test.sub.html`).
>>> We don't assign meaning to directories elsewhere other than informally
>>> "resources" / "support". At least, as far as I know. I think I'd
>>> prefer just the one convention.
>> I like the directory simply for grouping. If there's a new feature with a
>> lot of tests, the suffixes won't sort together as a collected bunch of
>> tests that folks who haven't hopped on board with the feature should be
>> ignoring.
>> But if I'm the only one who likes that idea, I'm happy to drop it in
>> favor of the simplicity of a single approach.
> I like this idea as well, but am also fine with starting simple and adding
> directory support later based of real world experience.
> Glad to see this happen. Thanks for following up.

`.tentative.*` going once... going twice... If there are no fundamental
objections, then I'm going to start landing patches using this convention.

Philip suggested elsewhere that it might be a good idea to ensure that the
tentative test files in some way refer to the discussion that they're in
support of. I could imagine formalizing that as a `<link rel="help"
href="[link to GitHub issue/PR]">`. WDYT?


Received on Wednesday, 24 May 2017 12:02:45 UTC