On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 9:20 PM, Maciej Stachowiak <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Jun 14, 2012, at 9:06 PM, Adam Barth <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 9:02 PM, Ojan Vafai <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> Seems like it will be a common error to mark a reftest failure as > >> ImageOnlyFail and then be confused why it's not working, no? > > > > Maybe that can be solved with another name, like PixelOnlyFailure. > I'm OK with trying it this way. We can always have another <strike>bikeshed</strike> fruitful discussion if it turns out to be a frequent cause of confusion in practice. Not sure one name is any more clear than the other. PixelOnlyFailure seems fine to me since others have expressed a preference in the past for Pixel over Image. > That sounds good. We could also make it an error to apply PixelOnlyFailure > (or what have you) to a text-only test, a reftest, or an audio test. Error > in the sense that it would be reported as a failure, with an informative > diagnostic saying it does not apply. > We already have a mechanism for "errors" like this. They are reported when you run the tests or when you run with --lint-test-files. At least on the chromium bots, this runs as a separate step that turns red when when you cause a lint failure. That way errors get noticed and addressed quickly (the lint step takes ~2 seconds to run). Ojan
_______________________________________________ webkit-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev
