I think we need to change something. I am not sure what -- I have
ideas, but -- I would appreciate some collective thinking on this.

PROBLEM: We accumulate more test failures via WebKit rolls than we fix
with our LTTF effort. This ain't right.

ANALYSIS:

Ok, WebKit gardening is hard. So is fixing layout tests. You can't
call it a successful WebKit roll if it breaks layout tests. But we
don't revert WebKit rolls. It's a forward-only thing. And we want to
roll quickly, so that we can react to next "big breaker" faster. So
we're stuck with roll-now/clean-up-after deal. This sucks, because the
"clean-up-after" is rarely fully completed. Which brings failing
layout tests, which brings the suffering and spells asymptotic doom to
the LTTF effort.

POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS:

* Extend WebKit gardener's duties to 4 days. First two days you roll.
Next two days you fix layout tests. Not file bugs -- actually fix
them. The net result of 4 days should be 0 (or less!) new layout test
failures. This solution kind of expects the gardener to be part of
LTTF, which is not always the case. So it may not seem totally fair.

* Assign LTTF folks specifically for test clean-up every day. The idea
here is to slant LTTF effort aggressively toward fixing newer
failures. This seems nice for the gardeners, but appears to separate
the action/responsibility dependency: no matter what you roll, the
LTTF elves will fix it.

* [ your idea goes here ]

TIMELINE:

I would like for us to agree on a solution and make the necessary
changes to the process today. Tomorrow is a new day, full of
surprising changes upstream.

:DG<

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

Reply via email to