I just updated
http://sites.google.com/a/chromium.org/dev/developers/testing/webkit-layout-tests
to
reflect these changes as well.
On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 10:40 AM, Ojan Vafai wrote:
> I think the data for the dashboard is fine. There's just some dashboard
> logic that needs updating. Will get o
Yeah, me too.
This is what tends to lead to me spending the day after my gardening
rotation doing clean up. Maybe if we had 2 people gardening at the same
time they could do this real time, but on a normal day, I think it is too
much for one person.
This tool is awesome though!
Julie
On Fri, J
I actually have a copy of the data from Tuesday at 2:30pm. If you need any
information out of the results page, just let me know.
Julie
On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 10:58 AM, Ojan Vafai wrote:
> I put some more thought into this. Given that we only store a month's worth
> of data, it's not worth do
Would another solution be to have canary bots for both release and debug?
On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 1:58 PM, Yaar Schnitman wrote:
> The layout try bots are just too slow for the purposes of webkit gardening,
> which needs to keep up with the fast stream of layout test breakage coming
> from webki
Another class of layout tests with bad setTimeouts in them -
Tests of the form:
...
function runTest() {
// Wait for img to load
setTimeout(step2, 200);
}
These tests are not flaky, but the setTimeouts are completely
unnecessary (body onload always fires AFTER the img loads) and are just
l
On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 10:04 AM, Aaron Boodman wrote:
>
> This is not really an extensions question. I think you want chromium-...@.
>
> - a
>
> On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 9:10 AM, Mixe wrote:
> >
> > Chrome does not support HTML5 spellcheck attribute? Then why
> > spellchecking is enabled by defa
Be sheriff that day :)
Real advice:
Once you have webkit patch R+'ed and chrome rebaselines ready, let the
gardener know. Once the gardener is caught up, they can set commit-queue
flag on your change, so it gets committed at a time when they are ready to
deal with it and your follow up change wil
I like the idea of ownership of groups of layout tests. Maybe these
directory "owners" could be more like the "finders"? An owner shouldn't
have to necessarily fix everything in a group/directory, but they should be
responsible for triaging and getting meaningful bugs filled for them, to
keep thi
We did this on my last project to deal with flaky test infrastructure. It
worked well in that test failures were pretty much guaranteed to be real (we
ran tests 3 times and only reported failure if a test failed all 3 times),
but it did definitely make us stop caring about flaky tests.
Idealizing
For those of you looking into flaky tests -
I've found a surprising number of tests that are flaky because they use a
setTimeout to guarantee that a resource (usually an iframe) has loaded.
This leads to slower running, flaky tests. To address this, change the
tests upstream to use onload instea
On Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 5:07 PM, Peter Kasting wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 4:40 PM, Julie Parent wrote:
>
>> Real examples I ran into in the past 2 days:
>>
>>- Failing tests because the baseline checked in is for an error page,
>>and we generate real
Problem:
People rubber stamp or TBR rebaselines instead of doing normal reviews,
because they are hard to review, due to lack of detailed knowledge about why
they are being rebaselined. This is causing bad baselines to be checked in,
which leads to layout test failures, which leads to sadness.
Pro
Are these running release or dbg?
On Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 1:12 PM, Marc-Antoine Ruel wrote:
>
> On Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 12:39 PM, Brett Wilson wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 10:13 AM, Marc-Antoine Ruel
> wrote:
> >>
> >> If you are not a committer, you can skip this message.
> >>
> >> If you
What is the best way to figure out which WebKit revision this corresponds
to? Some of the older release notes were including that information in the
notes, but I don't see it in the last few releases.
On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 5:28 PM, Jon wrote:
> See http://googlechromereleases.blogspot.com/ fo
On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 1:16 PM, Dirk Pranke wrote:
>
> Yup, I've already adopted that. Thanks!
>
> On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 12:55 PM, Thomas Van
> Lenten wrote:
> > Quick skimmed reply: Mac already has expectations per OS where we need
> them,
> > so you might be able to follow that basic model (
If anyone sees this somewhere other than Gmail replies, please comment on
the bug.
On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 1:00 PM, Nick Baum wrote:
> Doh, thanks!
> -Nick
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 12:18 PM, Peter Kasting wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 12:17 PM, Nick Baum wrote:
>>
>>> Has anyone else
16 matches
Mail list logo
