On Sep 12, 2011, at 4:23 PM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
> Notwithstanding all the later discussion, I think run-bindings-tests would
> still be more effective as a build step that updates a source file rather
> than a test step.
I see, a build step that updates a checked-in source file. Sounds li
On Sep 8, 2011, at 12:25 PM, Darin Adler wrote:
> On Sep 8, 2011, at 11:49 AM, Alexey Proskuryakov wrote:
>
>> As discussed on IRC, I do not think that bots should run this test at all.
>> It has a non-trivial maintenance cost, but provides very little benefit.
>> Even the time spent by multip
On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 10:17 AM, Geoffrey Garen wrote:
> I also think it’s good to have a WebKit-specific or specific-enough word in
> script names when possible so you can have the scripts in your path even
> when not working on WebKit. That’s why run-webkit-tests has the word WebKit
> in it, and
On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 7:59 AM, Adam Roben wrote:
>
> An alternate path to success would be:
>
> 1) Decide what to call the script that just runs tests from LayoutTests
> 2) Rename run-webkit-tests to that new name and add a new script called
> run-webkit-tests that just calls the renamed script
>
> I also think it’s good to have a WebKit-specific or specific-enough word in
> script names when possible so you can have the scripts in your path even when
> not working on WebKit. That’s why run-webkit-tests has the word WebKit in it,
> and run-safari does not.
I'd suggest one script -- run-
On Sep 9, 2011, at 9:07 AM, Adam Barth wrote:
> run-layout-tests?
Sorry in advance for bikeshed'ing this:
That would be a good name if we thought LayoutTests was the right name for our
main regression test suite. Since I think it’s not, I would love to figure out
that new name and have the scr
On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 12:07 PM, Adam Barth wrote:
> run-layout-tests?
>
too obvious. as an ode to Paul, I propose
run-the-mother-effing-layout-tests
http://mothereffinghsl.com/
;)
> On Sep 9, 2011 8:04 AM, "Adam Roben" wrote:
> > On Sep 9, 2011, at 10:59 AM, Adam Roben wrote:
> >
> >> On
run-layout-tests?
On Sep 9, 2011 8:04 AM, "Adam Roben" wrote:
> On Sep 9, 2011, at 10:59 AM, Adam Roben wrote:
>
>> On Sep 9, 2011, at 10:52 AM, Eric Seidel wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 12:44 PM, Darin Adler wrote:
On Sep 8, 2011, at 12:29 PM, Eric Seidel wrote:
> I'm happy
On Sep 9, 2011, at 10:59 AM, Adam Roben wrote:
> On Sep 9, 2011, at 10:52 AM, Eric Seidel wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 12:44 PM, Darin Adler wrote:
>>> On Sep 8, 2011, at 12:29 PM, Eric Seidel wrote:
>>>
I'm happy to write a run-all-tests script which runs all known tests that
On Sep 9, 2011, at 10:52 AM, Eric Seidel wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 12:44 PM, Darin Adler wrote:
>> On Sep 8, 2011, at 12:29 PM, Eric Seidel wrote:
>>
>>> I'm happy to write a run-all-tests script which runs all known tests that
>>> platform can handle. :)
>>
>> I think run-webkit-tests s
On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 12:44 PM, Darin Adler wrote:
> On Sep 8, 2011, at 12:29 PM, Eric Seidel wrote:
>
>> I'm happy to write a run-all-tests script which runs all known tests that
>> platform can handle. :)
>
> I think run-webkit-tests should be this. We can come up with a new name for
> the “j
2011/9/8 Oliver Hunt :
> On Sep 8, 2011, at 7:21 PM, Alexey Proskuryakov wrote:
>> 08.09.2011, в 12:25, Darin Adler написал(а):
>>> I find the bindings tests quite helpful. Because the perl script is so hard
>>> to read, it’s the changes in bindings script test results that I look at
>>> when rev
On Sep 8, 2011, at 7:21 PM, Alexey Proskuryakov wrote:
>
> 08.09.2011, в 12:25, Darin Adler написал(а):
>
>> I find the bindings tests quite helpful. Because the perl script is so hard
>> to read, it’s the changes in bindings script test results that I look at
>> when reviewing changes to the
08.09.2011, в 12:25, Darin Adler написал(а):
> I find the bindings tests quite helpful. Because the perl script is so hard
> to read, it’s the changes in bindings script test results that I look at when
> reviewing changes to the bindings scripts. The fact that the results are
> checked in hel
On Sep 8, 2011, at 12:29 PM, Eric Seidel wrote:
> I'm happy to write a run-all-tests script which runs all known tests that
> platform can handle. :)
I think run-webkit-tests should be this. We can come up with a new name for the
“just run the tests in the LayoutTests directory” tool.
A bigger
On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 12:19 PM, Oliver Hunt wrote:
>
> The other problem is "people check in without looking at the bots". I do
> try to watch the bots, but the time between me landing and the bots actually
> going red can literally be hours. Of course i'm away from irc/email
> whatever when I
If the objection against run-bindings-tests is that they're not part
of some larger test script which developers can run locally, it's very
easy to add a wrapper script which runs all known testing harnesses.
The test tests which currently run on the bots include:
run-webkit-tests (minutes)
run-ja
2011/9/8 Darin Adler :
> I find the bindings tests quite helpful. Because the perl script is so hard
> to read, it’s the changes in bindings script test results that I look at
> when reviewing changes to the bindings scripts. The fact that the results
> are checked in helps me review patches.
> It
On Sep 8, 2011, at 11:49 AM, Alexey Proskuryakov wrote:
> As discussed on IRC, I do not think that bots should run this test at all. It
> has a non-trivial maintenance cost, but provides very little benefit. Even
> the time spent by multiple engineers on IRC today discussing bot complaints
> is
On Sep 8, 2011, at 11:55 AM, James Robinson wrote:
>
> We used to not run these tests on the bots. This meant that people would
> change the bindings code and not update the expected results, so the expected
> results were always massively out of date. This meant when patching the
> bindings
I'm not currently working on bindings, so I don't have very strong
opinions for or against the script.
I added it to the bots back in June so that the results would stop breaking.
It's possible such script would be more useful w/o checked in results, unclear.
I will point out that Darin Adler,
On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 11:49 AM, Alexey Proskuryakov wrote:
>
> 08.09.2011, в 11:32, Eric Seidel написал(а):
>
> > FYI: As many of you already know, the build.webkit.org bots run
> > "run-bindings-tests" on (almost) all platforms.
> >
> > They've been running (mostly w/o incident) on the bots si
08.09.2011, в 11:32, Eric Seidel написал(а):
> FYI: As many of you already know, the build.webkit.org bots run
> "run-bindings-tests" on (almost) all platforms.
>
> They've been running (mostly w/o incident) on the bots since 6/20:
> http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/89267
>
>
> These just mak
FYI: As many of you already know, the build.webkit.org bots run
"run-bindings-tests" on (almost) all platforms.
They've been running (mostly w/o incident) on the bots since 6/20:
http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/89267
These just make sure that our generated bindings look sane, by
comparing the
24 matches
Mail list logo
