Re: Unifying testsuite policy and getting rid of CSS exceptions

On 27/09/17 18:54, Philip Jägenstedt wrote:
> I also doubt that this is the final state of things, but I have to say it
> does fulfill the most important of my goals, which is to make the
> organization more approachable (one directory per spec), allowing Blink's
> layout and style teams to work more effectively with them.
> 
> Having to add <link rel=help> even where it's obvious from context is a bit
> annoying, but it seems quite tolerable as long as it shows up early in the
> process (presubmit or review) when people are already expecting feedback.
> It may well turn out in 3-6 months that this is the top complaint about
> working with wpt, and then I think we should address it.
> 
> I also expect that wpt.fyi will keep getting better to the point where
> using that is the only sensible choice, and then we might have this
> discussion again, about how to deal with what is effectively long lived
> branches of the CSS specs, but not of the test suite.
> 
> Progress?
> 


Yeah, a simpler directory structure is certainly progress. But I worry 
that there are historical examples of people refusing to submit 
perfectly good testsuites to CSS because of metadata requirements. 
Making that metadata almost a noop isn't going to help convince people 
that they aren't being asked to perform pointless makework. However, as 
you say, it should become more obvious what the actual effect is in a 
few months.

Received on Wednesday, 27 September 2017 21:19:42 UTC