>> On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 3:11 PM, Ojan Vafai <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> I don't think this is just about ignoring image-only results on mac for >>> the short-term. My subjective sense is that we have many tests that start >>> out as failing only image comparisons (e.g. due to theming), but over time >>> another failure creeps in that causes a text failure that goes unnoticed. >>> We'd ideally like to notice that extra regression when it happens as it >>> might be easy to identify and fix right at the time the regression occurs. >> >> That's pretty much where we are with the Mac pixel tests--we do want to >> know if layout geometry regresses, even if there's a known pixel expectation >> failure (a color, or a missing spelling underline, or whatever it is for >> that test). >> --Amanda >> >
I'm on record earlier as wanting to know when even the expected errors change, so this seems to me like a nice half-way compromise. Pam is right, of course, that we should be targeting zero errors, but I don't think this will really slow us much in that effort (and it'll probably help). -- Dirk --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Chromium Developers mailing list: [email protected] View archives, change email options, or unsubscribe: http://groups.google.com/group/chromium-dev -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
