W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps-testsuite@w3.org > April 2013

Re: RfR: Opera's Server-sent Events tests; deadline April 17

From: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2013 09:01:51 -0400
Message-ID: <5171403F.4010309@nokia.com>
To: "ext odinho@opera.com" <odinho@opera.com>, "Zhao, Tina" <tina.zhao@intel.com>
CC: "public-webapps-testsuite@w3.org" <public-webapps-testsuite@w3.org>
On 4/19/13 3:19 AM, ext odinho@opera.com wrote:
>
> Well that looks pretty thorough to me :) But your review comments have 
> to be fixed before we merge.
>
>
> Will try doing that if noone beats me to it.
>

OK, so if I understand correctly, the next step is for Odin (or someone 
else) to fix the test issues Tina identified and after those fixes are 
reviewed, Tina or Odin will merge the related PR. And, after that, we 
should be ready to start CR interop testing. Is that `about right`?

Tina - when you update the SSE interop data, would you please use a 
newer version of Firefox? Does anyone object to Tina using Firefox Nightly?

(FYI, earlier this week I ran the first 5-10 SSE tests on FFNightly and 
got many more passes than with the version identified in the interop 
report).

-AB


> --
>
> Sent from my Nokia N9
>
>
> On 19.04.13 05:31 Zhao, Tina wrote:
>
> This is my first time to review test cases and I’ve sent my review 
> comments at Jan and March. And got one feedback from Ms2ger.
>
> But I’m not sure if my last comment [1] was enough to say all the 
> OperaSSE tests “looks good” and would be counted as a real review 
> process.
>
> Please advice if I miss any public review process, and I could call 
> for a real review for Opera’s SSE tests in mail list.
>
> [1] 
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps-testsuite/2013Mar/0043.html 
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Tina
>
> *From:*odinho@opera.com [mailto:odinho@opera.com]
> *Sent:* Thursday, April 18, 2013 10:03 PM
> *To:* public-webapps-testsuite@w3.org
> *Subject:* Re: RfR: Opera's Server-sent Events tests; deadline April 17
>
> What I think is special about these tests, by the way, is that the 
> submitter, that is Opera won't say: we think every single assertion in 
> this testsuite follows the spec.
>
> Normally, for every other testsuite, you have someone claiming that. 
> If we had said that then I think noone would have a problem merging it 
> right away.
>
> So someone has to parent these tests or say "looks good", because as 
> far as I can see, we don't have that now. If not Tina can say that (or 
> already did, anyone found the mail?).
>
> So this case is a bit special.
>
> What I personally /can/ say is that they are generally correct, but I 
> can't vouch for every assertion as I have not yet gone through them all.
>
> Does that make any sense? Sorry for condensing all that into a 
> possibly insulting word of 'real review'.
>
> --
>
> Sent from my Nokia N9
>
> On 18.04.13 14:31 Odin Hørthe Omdal wrote:
>
> On Thu, Apr 18, 2013, at 14:08, Arthur Barstow wrote:
> > Odin - what do you mean by "real" here?
>
> Well, one that will find us faults. That doesn't get accepted by
> default. Actually there might have been a real review here now, -- but
> we don't know that :-)
>
> So if anyone says, "I have looked through them and they're not diverging
> from the spec" that's a real review.
>
> > > I personally have the interest, but not the time.
> > >
> > > So, everyone, do it in GitHub. Find the issues that might be lurking.
> > > Can possible start with saying what tests are reviewed. Since this 
> is a
> > > full testsuite I think Critic would be much easier to do an actual
> > > review in (because you can mark individual files as reviewed).
> >
> > Tina - my recollection is that you reviewed Opera's SSE tests. Is that
> > true?
>
> A LGTM from Tina would be enough, yes. I understood it as that
> gothrough had a scope smaller than looking for faults in each file?
>
> Anyway, they have been reviewed multiple times before, but that was
> before many of the spec changes. The tests are quite old. But they
> should be mostly correct. And we had Yaffle who corrected many of the
> known issues at least. :)
>
> -- 
>
> Odin Hørthe Omdal
>
> odinho@opera.com <mailto:odinho@opera.com>
>
>
Received on Friday, 19 April 2013 13:02:46 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 18:52:57 UTC