W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-test-infra@w3.org > July to September 2017

Re: Unifying testsuite policy and getting rid of CSS exceptions

From: Geoffrey Sneddon <me@gsnedders.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2017 13:18:29 +0900
Message-ID: <CAHKdfMhsiS-N7zCSR=5TkuFGk5f248xm90dX9QSdkDpMrMmZ1g@mail.gmail.com>
To: Robert Ma <robertma@google.com>
Cc: Philip Jägenstedt <foolip@google.com>, James Graham <james@hoppipolla.co.uk>, public-test-infra <public-test-infra@w3.org>, Quinten Yearsley <qyearsley@google.com>
That seems like it'll be relatively brittle, given tests moving are
often accompanied by changing paths that appear within them. 100% just
seems too strong.


On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 4:21 AM, Robert Ma <robertma@google.com> wrote:
> We use `git diff -M100% --diff-filter=[D,R]` under the hood to detect
> deleted and renamed/moved tests respectively. Based on the git output,
> we move the baselines and modify expectation lines accordingly.
> Code can be found here:
> https://cs.chromium.org/chromium/src/third_party/WebKit/Tools/Scripts/webkitpy/w3c/test_importer.py?l=522&rcl=c0e9500011d99dfd43654e5217253c3107e3f4ec
> On Sat, Sep 16, 2017 at 8:31 AM, Philip Jägenstedt <foolip@google.com> wrote:
>> On Sat, Sep 16, 2017 at 1:00 AM James Graham <james@hoppipolla.co.uk> wrote:
>>> On 16/09/17 04:51, Philip Jägenstedt wrote:
>>> > On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 6:42 PM Alan Stearns <stearns@adobe.com> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> Given that there are costs associated with moving tests around, I’m
>>> >> slightly in favor of leaving current tests where they are.
>>> >>
>>> >
>>> > Can you elaborate a bit on this? I don't disagree that there is *some*
>>> > cost, but at least from my vantage point it seems quite acceptable. When
>>> > tests are renamed we deal with it in the Chromium import process, and
>>> > doesn't require us to treat all of the renamed files as if they were
>>> > new.
>>> > If there are other bits of tooling that don't handle renames well, I
>>> > wouldn't mind investing a bit of time fixing that.
>>> Our import process doesn't (currently) deal with moving tests well. We
>>> can and should improve that. However a one-time patch moving lots of
>>> paths is something that we could deal with manually, so that shouldn't
>>> be a blocker to choosing a better organisation.
>> I see. Quinten, Robert, can you share something about how the rename
>> detection for our import works, does it only handle change-free renames, or
>> is there a similarity threshold of sorts?
>> In any case, it's good to hear that simple directory renames aren't an issue
>> for Gecko.
>> Would directory renaming create trouble for anyone else?
Received on Tuesday, 19 September 2017 04:25:10 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:34:13 UTC