> On Jun 15, 2019, at 9:13 PM, Aakash Jain <aakash_j...@apple.com> wrote:
>
> 1) Do not upload archive (for layout-test-results) on bugzilla, instead
> upload it to another server, unzip it and post a link to the results.html.
> Pros:
> a) Engineers won't have to download the attachment, unzip it, look for
> failures, and then delete it from their disk. They can simply click the url
> to view the results.
> b) This approach will also reduce 2 comments per failure to 1 comment.
> Currently there are two comments per failure, one for failure details, second
> for bugzilla attachment.
Great improvement to do this. The most confusing thing about build bot comments
is all the “creation of attachments” extra text with things like “attachment
number” and “patch".
However, it’s really nice that I can download a directory full of test results
easily. I’d like to see the EWS website still have that feature.
> 4) When a patch becomes 'obsolete', tag the corresponding EWS comments as
> 'obsolete', so that they will be hidden.
Incredibly valuable.
> 5) Do not comment on bugzilla bug at all
I think this makes sense. I don’t see a reason that test results need to be
comments. I think the “red bubble” in EWS already calls someone’s attention to
failures.
If we want to augment it, we should think of what we are aiming at. I do find
it useful to see which tests are failing, and when I click on the red bubble I
don’t see that information. I have to click once to see the “log of activities”
then click on “results”, then see a confusing giant file with lots of other
information. At the bottom of that file the one thing I want to know.
A better hierarchy is to put that “what new tests are failing” summary right t
the top and let the logs be fallbacks, not the primary place to see the
features.
> instead send email to the author of the patch.
Why? I don’t think this should send any emails at all, unless the person
requested it.
> Pros: less noisy, also this will allow to include more detailed information
> about the failure in email.
I think the more detailed information should be on the webpage, not in an email.
> Cons: reviewers would have to click status-bubbles to see the failures,
> failure information is not immediately present in the comments.
I think we should start with this approach, eliminating the comments entirely.
— Darin
_______________________________________________
webkit-dev mailing list
webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev
