Sounds like a good idea.-Darin

On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 10:53 PM, David Levin <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 10:41 PM, Darin Fisher <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Yeah, good point... this could be a good task for gardeners.  Perhaps we
>> could have a tool help us here.
>
>
> Maybe there could be a test run on the canary that checks the DEPS to see
> if they have the same versions, and if they aren't, it turns "orange" to
> indicate some action should be taken.
>
>
>
>> -Darin
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 10:26 PM, Dmitry Titov <[email protected]>wrote:
>>
>>> It seems that if the deps were the same though, the rolls would be on
>>> average less breaking because at least it would test WebKit on WebKit bots
>>> with same versions of V8, Skia etc as post-roll. So single DEPS could make
>>> gardening simpler but other changes (like update Skia for UI) harder. I see
>>> the point. Yeah, it is optional for gardener to roll WebKit DEPS,
>>> although someone will have to do this periodically so why not?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 9:08 PM, Darin Fisher <[email protected]>wrote:
>>>
>>>> That seems optional to me.  I don't see why it matters that much.  The
>>>> canary bots will still be using DEPS from svn.chromium.org, so we
>>>> should get sufficient coverage there.  That will allow us to be confident
>>>> about updating WebKit, right?
>>>> The upstream builder is first and foremost designed to help non-Chromium
>>>> WebKit contributors build and repair the PLATFORM(CHROMIUM) port.  So, all
>>>> we need for that is a stable set of dependencies.  They don't strictly
>>>> speaking need to be up-to-date unless there is an interface change of
>>>> course.
>>>>
>>>> -Darin
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 8:44 PM, Dmitry Titov <[email protected]>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I guess WebKit gardener will need to bump the WebKit DEPS to the
>>>>> version numbers from Chromium if Chromium's go ahead... To have more
>>>>> predictable result of roll and to keep them more or less in sync...
>>>>>
>>>>>  On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 7:43 PM, Darin Fisher <[email protected]>wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>  That's basically what we had before.
>>>>>> You can add entries to a DEPS file that have the value From("foo"),
>>>>>> and that causes the value of the entry to be taken from the path 
>>>>>> foo/DEPS,
>>>>>> where foo is a directory at the same level as the directory containing 
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> DEPS file that mentioned From("foo").  Originally, chrome's DEPS file 
>>>>>> lived
>>>>>> in chrome/DEPS instead of src/, and the submodules were the ones that 
>>>>>> were
>>>>>> siblings to the chrome directory.
>>>>>> There's a lot of shared dependencies.  I'm not sure that for trunk
>>>>>> development, it makes sense to require a WebKit roll to update DEPS for 
>>>>>> all
>>>>>> of those shared dependencies.  I'm concerned that will slow us down.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Can we try having separate sets of dependencies for now?  I think the
>>>>>> point of the WebKit standalone build is to help vet changes to WebCore.  
>>>>>> It
>>>>>> is less about vetting changes to the modules.  The canary bot can cover
>>>>>> those.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We could write a tool to sync deps, which we run periodically.  I
>>>>>> think the Chromium repository should probably hold the truth.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -Darin
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 4:46 PM, David Levin <[email protected]>wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> What about the override approach that I mentioned?
>>>>>>> Have the dependency listed in webkit alone. If you need to roll the
>>>>>>> deps before rolling webkit, add a line in the chromium deps that 
>>>>>>> overrides
>>>>>>> the one from webkit.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 3:00 PM, Darin Fisher <[email protected]>wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 1:12 PM, David Levin <[email protected]>wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> > Q: When I change src/DEPS, do I also have to change upstream
>>>>>>>>>> > third_party/WebKit/WebKit/chromium/DEPS?
>>>>>>>>>> > A: It depends why you update src/DEPS. Theoretically, you should
>>>>>>>>>> only update
>>>>>>>>>> > the upstream DEPS if the fix to the dependency actually changes
>>>>>>>>>> the way
>>>>>>>>>> > webkit interacts with it, or fixes a bug in the webkit layout
>>>>>>>>>> tests.
>>>>>>>>>> > However, if the change is only relevant to chromium, than
>>>>>>>>>> webkit's DEPS need
>>>>>>>>>> > not be updated. If that change breaks webkit, we will surely
>>>>>>>>>> find it when we
>>>>>>>>>> > build chromium.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> This seems like a mistake having out of sync rev may cause all
>>>>>>>>> sorts of issues. Here's a simple one suppose there is a rev that 
>>>>>>>>> fixes some
>>>>>>>>> issue and adds an assert and it is only done in chromium.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Now code is changed in webkit which would trigger this assert. This
>>>>>>>>> increases the pain for rolls and seems like a mistake.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Ask anyone who was around when we had transitive deps.  It royally
>>>>>>>> sucked.  I really do not want to go there again ;-)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Once we finish the WebKit API, we'll be able to make Chromium
>>>>>>>> tip-of-tree use a snapshot of WebKit.  However, we might need to rev 
>>>>>>>> Skia
>>>>>>>> independently to pick up features for the Chrome UI.  We shouldn't 
>>>>>>>> have to
>>>>>>>> branch WebKit just to update Skia.  Same goes for the majority of the 
>>>>>>>> shared
>>>>>>>> dependencies.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I think it is better if we have two separate configurations.
>>>>>>>>  Testing WebKit in isolation just depends on some reasonable set of
>>>>>>>> dependencies.  Then, we'll also test Chromium+WebKit(head) using the 
>>>>>>>> canary
>>>>>>>> bots.  This will test with dependencies matching those used by
>>>>>>>> Chromium+WebKit(stable).  So, I think we'll get the coverage we need.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Another choice is to have a shared master location for dependencies.
>>>>>>>>  However, both svn.webkit.org and svn.chromium.org would need to
>>>>>>>> hardcode the revision of that master location, so you are back to 
>>>>>>>> having to
>>>>>>>> rev a number in two locations.  We don't want to have either repository
>>>>>>>> pointing to the head of the master location since that would make it
>>>>>>>> difficult to cut branches or refer to a particular revision of the
>>>>>>>> repository.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> -Darin
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
Chromium Developers mailing list: [email protected] 
View archives, change email options, or unsubscribe: 
    http://groups.google.com/group/chromium-dev
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to