The results load considerably faster now. For runs where many tests fail,
the filesize is considerably smaller than the old-run-webkit-tests
filesize. Also,
I've added in the image toggling behavior of old-run-webkit-tests and made
the aesthetics a bit closer to the old-run-webkit-test format.
On May 3, 2011, at 4:01 PM, Ojan Vafai wrote:
The results load considerably faster now. For runs where many tests fail, the
filesize is considerably smaller than the old-run-webkit-tests filesize.
Also, I've added in the image toggling behavior of old-run-webkit-tests and
made the
On Tue, May 3, 2011 at 1:44 PM, Adam Roben aro...@apple.com wrote:
On May 3, 2011, at 4:01 PM, Ojan Vafai wrote:
The results load considerably faster now. For runs where many tests fail,
the filesize is considerably smaller than the
old-run-webkit-tests filesize. Also, I've added in the
Is that a good example? It doesn't remind me much of the ORWT output.
The disclosure triangles don't seem to do anything for hte failures on
that page.
On Tue, May 3, 2011 at 2:05 PM, Ojan Vafai o...@chromium.org wrote:
On Tue, May 3, 2011 at 1:44 PM, Adam Roben aro...@apple.com wrote:
On
Here is a link to the NRWT bot running the Mac Leopard Release build:
http://build.webkit.org/results/Leopard%20Intel%20Release%20(NRWT)/r85644%20(142)/results.html
-- Dirk
On Tue, May 3, 2011 at 2:14 PM, Eric Seidel e...@webkit.org wrote:
Is that a good example? It doesn't remind me much of
IIRC the showing wdiff when there is no wdiff bug has since been
fixed? (but that bot just hasn't updated?)
what's the failure type column? (and why can't I select its text?)
Why do expected flaky tests show up in the Expected to fail but passed list?
Seems expected flaky tests should be in
If we have + buttons for all the failures, might as well have them for
the http logs too. :p
On Tue, May 3, 2011 at 2:23 PM, Eric Seidel e...@webkit.org wrote:
IIRC the showing wdiff when there is no wdiff bug has since been
fixed? (but that bot just hasn't updated?)
what's the failure type
On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 10:05 PM, Maciej Stachowiak m...@apple.com wrote:
On Apr 21, 2011, at 4:47 PM, Ojan Vafai wrote:
On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 4:21 PM, Maciej Stachowiak m...@apple.com wrote:
(2) Slow to load (apparently it loads a 3 meg JSON file before displaying
anything?)
Loading
http://build.chromium.org/f/chromium/layout_test_results/Webkit_Linux_64/results/layout-test-results/results.htmlshows
the latest run of Chromium's Linux 64 bot.
Beware the expand all link with that many failures. It gets very slow.
On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 2:36 PM, Eric Seidel e...@webkit.org
Some concerns with this new format:
(1) Takes two lines per entry unless you make your window ridiculously wide.
This makes it hard to scan.
(2) Slow to load (apparently it loads a 3 meg JSON file before displaying
anything?)
(3) I like PrettyPatch format better than wdiff format.
(4) Blue
Thanks for the quick feedback.
On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 4:21 PM, Maciej Stachowiak m...@apple.com wrote:
(1) Takes two lines per entry unless you make your window ridiculously
wide. This makes it hard to scan.
I'll make it whitespace:nowrap. That will mean the right side might get cut
off,
On Apr 21, 2011, at 4:47 PM, Ojan Vafai wrote:
Thanks for the quick feedback.
On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 4:21 PM, Maciej Stachowiak m...@apple.com wrote:
(1) Takes two lines per entry unless you make your window ridiculously wide.
This makes it hard to scan.
I'll make it
As of r84294, new-run-webkit-tests's results.html has a new format.
Non-chromium people, feel free to take a look and see if this addresses your
concerns in https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=37736. Chromium people,
if you encounter problems or have feature requests, please let me know or
Would be nice to have a live demo to see all the new javascripty-ness.
Do you have an example from a NRWT run on build.webkit.org or
build.chromium.org?
Thanks for all your work on this, Ojan.
-eric
On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 2:29 PM, Ojan Vafai o...@chromium.org wrote:
As of r84294,
14 matches
Mail list logo
