On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 11:37 AM, Ojan Vafai<o...@chromium.org> wrote:
> The end goal is to be in a state where we have near zero failing tests that
> are not for unimplemented features. And new failures from the merge get
> addressed within a week.
> Once we're at that point, would this new infrastructure be useful? I
> completely support infrastructure that sustainably supports us being at near
> zero failing tests (e.g. the rebaseline tool). All infrastructure/process
> has a maintenance cost though.
True enough. There are at least two counterexamples that are worth
considering. The first is that probably won't be at zero failing tests
any time soon (where "any time soon" == next 3-6 months), and so there
may be intermediary value. The second is that we have a policy of
running every test, even tests for unimplemented features, and so we
may catch regressions for the foreseeable future.
That said, I don't know if the value will offset the cost. Hence the
desire to run a couple of cheap experiments :)
-- Dirk
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
Chromium Developers mailing list: chromium-dev@googlegroups.com
View archives, change email options, or unsubscribe:
http://groups.google.com/group/chromium-dev
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
