> Another consideration here is "would my test be useful for other browser > vendors". I don't think the answer is a unanimous "yes", so I think we > should only use WPT for tests that will think are worth sharing. >
Agreed that some tests, especially the ones dedicated to WebKit specificities should be kept in WebKit. The risk is that these changes might be changed upstreamed in small/stylistic ways and no longer cover the initial case. That does not prevent to use WPT infrastructure for these tests, especially if it eases authoring. As a temporary measure, Chris mentioned the possibility to have inside the WPT folder a folder dedicated to "to-be-upstreamed" tests. > I'm also concerned that with 4 vendors upstreaming their WPT tests, the > WPT repo will just become a morass of partially overlapping tests that > takes 4x longer to run than a curated repo. > This is an issue in WebKit repository as well. I saw some clean-up done in WPT though. Sharing this goal and effort amongst the different communities might end up with a better result. Note also that spec editors are usually involved in WPT, which might help organizing the test suites in better ways. Simon > > > _______________________________________________ > webkit-dev mailing list > webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org > https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev >
_______________________________________________ webkit-dev mailing list webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev
