Do we plan to live on the edge of the wave once we're entirely unforked, and never do merges again? - Pam
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 11:01 AM, Darin Fisher <[email protected]> wrote: > This sounds good to me as a temporary measure while we are still doing > merges. > We are supposed to be unforked by the end of the quarter, right? ;-) > > -Darin > > > On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 2:49 PM, Ojan Vafai <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> In the spirit of trying to fix all the layout tests that represent >> real regressions since our initial launch, I've just committed a >> changelist that defers the tests that are failing that are new to >> webkit since the revision of our launch or whose expectations changed >> upstream (the latter was only a couple tests, the former was almost 80 >> tests). If people think this is an awful idea, I can rollback. >> >> I don't think it makes sense to block releases to the stable channel >> on new tests that we've never passed. My biggest concern with each >> release is breaking sites that previously used to work in Chrome. New >> tests, for the most part, don't represent regressions like that. Does >> it make sense to make a policy of deferring new, failing tests from a >> webkit merge by default. The person doing the merge should put a good >> faith effort into getting it fixed, but it shouldn't block cutting a >> release. >> >> Eventually we'll get to a point where we only have deferred tests left >> and we can start tackling that long list of tests without having it >> hinder our ability to push releases to the stable channel. >> >> Ojan >> >> >> > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Chromium Developers mailing list: [email protected] View archives, change email options, or unsubscribe: http://groups.google.com/group/chromium-dev -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
