W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > October 2016

Re: PROPOSED RESOLUTION: merge csswg-test into web-platform-tests

From: Alan Stearns <stearns@adobe.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2016 00:30:28 +0000
To: Geoffrey Sneddon <me@gsnedders.com>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
Message-ID: <F3CCC099-868E-4EF9-9F3C-EEB94A6E6D65@adobe.com>
On 9/27/16, 9:23 AM, "Geoffrey Sneddon" <me@gsnedders.com> wrote:



>(Bcc'd public-css-testsuite and public-test-infra; this pertains to a
>CSS WG proposed resolution and hence we should keep discussion on the
>CSS WG's public mailing list.)
>
>The proposed resolution is to merge csswg-test into
>web-platform-tests, doing the following:
>
>1. Land https://github.com/w3c/wpt-tools/pull/90 into wpt-tools so
>that the web-platform-tests tools create an accurate manifest (i.e.,
>list of tests) for the CSS testsuite.
>
>2. Add a number of lints to wpt-tools, for the (currently
>non-existent) css subdirectory, to ensure that the build system keeps
>working (primarily we need lints to ensure that we have no duplicate
>file-extensionless-basenames that aren't byte-for-byte identical and
>that all files referenced by test files are in an adjacent support or
>reference directory, with a couple of exceptions).
>
>3. Ensure web-platform-tests's documentation is up-to-date and
>cohesive, both for submitting tests and reviewing them. Especially
>make sure it's easier to find documentation than it is currently!
>
>4. Make https://hg.csswg.org/test/ and http://test.csswg.org/shepherd/

>read-only. (Really this can be any step up until this point; exact
>timing doesn't matter.)
>
>5. Merge csswg-test into web-platform-tests, in a css/ subdirectory,
>maintaining all csswg-test history. (Do we want to copy w3ctestlib and
>apiclient into it as well, given they currently live in Mercurial, and
>are needed to build?)
>
>6. Move over, at the very least, all open issues and PRs from the
>csswg-test repository.
>
>7. (Sometime in the more distant future) drop the current build system
>and the lints we had for its requirements.
>
>I believe Alan's opinion was to give people a week to respond on the
>mailing list and then potentially have a final call for objections (or
>discussion!) on the next telecon (5 Oct). I'll let the chairs to say
>what they want to do, though. :)
>
>/Geoffrey.

Reading through this thread, I see these amendments/clarifications:

Step 3 is particularly important

Step 5: leave w3ctestlib/apiclient separate for now, with a GitHub mirror for w3ctestlib

Throughout these steps, the test harness must be kept working.

If there are no further comments or requests, let’s resolve on starting this on the call tomorrow.

Thanks,

Alan
Received on Wednesday, 12 October 2016 00:31:07 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Monday, 23 January 2023 02:15:01 UTC