I am glad we were able to make this happen. Thanks for all the feedback on this particular issue and other blink/infra related issues. We definitely need your feedback to make blink/infra better.
Thank you, all! On Mon, Aug 29, 2022 at 9:07 AM Philip Jägenstedt <[email protected]> wrote: > I'd like to second that, thanks Weizhong! > > On Mon, Aug 29, 2022 at 5:07 AM Domenic Denicola <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> This is great news! Thanks for being receptive to feedback and to working >> to get us back to a more-productive state. >> >> On Sat, Aug 27, 2022 at 8:53 AM Xianzhu Wang <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> Hi Blink devs, >>> >>> The move has landed (https://crrev.com/1039971). >>> >>> If you have any pending CLs that add/remove/modify files under >>> web_tests/platform/generic, please sync, and add/remove/modify the >>> corresponding file under web_tests/ instead. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Xianzhu >>> >>> On Fri, Aug 26, 2022 at 10:57 AM Weizhong Xia <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Blink devs >>>> >>>> FYI we are finally ready to move generic baselines back to their >>>> original places: the test folders. I plan to land the CL today. To avoid >>>> any merge conflict during this process, we will add an OWNERS file to >>>> //third_party/blink/web_tests/platform/generic. Any change to that folder >>>> will require an additional +1, and will not be approved. Once the move is >>>> done, the "platform/generic" folder will be removed. >>>> >>>> thanks, Weizhong >>>> >>>> On Thu, Jun 23, 2022 at 11:00 AM Weizhong Xia <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi blink devs >>>>> >>>>> Thanks to those who joined the survey at >>>>> https://forms.gle/ju45qciS5VTR4ywN7. Most of you expressed the desire >>>>> to put baselines at the same place of the tests. Your voice is heard, and >>>>> here is the plan for the next step. >>>>> >>>>> In Q3 we will work on to completely separate legacy layout tests and >>>>> wpt tests, to put them under `third_party/blink/web_tests` and >>>>> `third_party/blink/wpt_tests` respectively. Generic baselines (including >>>>> generic virtual baselines) will be moved back to their previous place. >>>>> Rebaseline tool will be updated to work with this structure, and update >>>>> baselines for legacy layout tests and wpt tests in a single run. We will >>>>> have different copies of *TestExpectations*, *FlagSpecificConfig*, >>>>> *VirtualTestSuites* etc for legacy tests and wpt tests. When working >>>>> on those files, we will need to make sure we are updating the correct copy >>>>> of the file. (We will investigate if we need some presubmit check for such >>>>> a scenario). >>>>> >>>>> The reason for this is two fold: as requested we want to put baselines >>>>> side to side to the tests, and we want to make the directory structure >>>>> right to speed up the switch to wptrunner. >>>>> >>>>> Thoughts? Feel free to leave a comment in crbug/1299834 >>>>> <https://crbug.com/1299834>. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, Weizhong >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Mon, Jun 6, 2022 at 5:00 PM Xianzhu Wang <[email protected]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On Mon, Jun 6, 2022 at 3:52 PM Weizhong Xia <[email protected]> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Xianzhu, yes 'baselines' is the name we agreed on previously. The >>>>>>> reason I later changed back to use 'platform' is because that will make >>>>>>> the >>>>>>> CL smaller, and make it easier for gerrit to handle it. We can make one >>>>>>> round rename when everything is stabilized. (I left you a message when >>>>>>> you >>>>>>> are OOO. I am not sure if that message lived long enough for you to >>>>>>> catch >>>>>>> it.) >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I caught the message. I guessed that the name 'platform' might be one >>>>>> of the reasons for the surprise to blink developers after the change, and >>>>>> the name 'baselines' might make the change easier to explain :) >>>>>> >>>>>> On Mon, Jun 6, 2022 at 3:52 PM Domenic Denicola <[email protected]> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> I'm not sure I understand this logic. -expected.txt files are just >>>>>>> more-convenient, more in-your-face versions of TestExpectations files. >>>>>>> Surely you're not suggesting we get rid of TestExpectations files? >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Sorry, "-expected.txt ... should be ... eventually be removed" in my >>>>>> previous email was not clear. I meant for each individual -expected.txt >>>>>> we >>>>>> should eventually remove it because we should fix the failure. The same >>>>>> logic applies to TestExpectations. At any time we may allow a certain >>>>>> number of failures but we should keep the number as small as possible. >>>>>> >>>>>> I think we should prefer TestExpectations to -expected.txt for WPT >>>>>> tests because the entries in TestExpectations have associated bugs which >>>>>> track the fixing process, unless we find a better way to track the fixing >>>>>> of the failures in -expected.txt. -expected.txt files do have their >>>>>> values, >>>>>> e.g. for partially-passing tests we can discover regressions and >>>>>> progressions of individual sub tests, but they should be rare. >>>>>> >>>>>> I think separating -expected.txt from the tests has the following >>>>>> benefits: >>>>>> - It makes it clear to blink developers that the files are not a part >>>>>> of WPT. >>>>>> - It simplifies the WPT export/import process and others by reducing >>>>>> blink-specific files under external/wpt. >>>>>> >>>>>> It does make it more difficult to find -expected.txt, but we already >>>>>> have the similar well-known logic for platform-specific baselines. Though >>>>>> platform-specific baselines are rare, ignoring a platform baseline can >>>>>> still cause surprises. >>>>>> >>>>>> I think we can improve the test result viewer >>>>>> <https://test-results.appspot.com/data/layout_results/Mac10_15_Tests/26148/blink_web_tests/layout-test-results/results.html> >>>>>> - to better show -expected.txt for passing tests >>>>>> - to show information about tests without actually running the tests >>>>>> WDYT? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Mon, Jun 6, 2022 at 6:30 PM Xianzhu Wang < >>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I think we first need to answer a question: Why do we need >>>>>>>> *-expected.txt for WPT tests? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Upstream WPT doesn't have *-expected.txt. *-expected.txt is a >>>>>>>> blink-specific thing to allow some failing WPT tests to pass on blink >>>>>>>> with >>>>>>>> temporarily allowed failures. If a test has -expected.txt, it means >>>>>>>> Chrome >>>>>>>> behaves differently than the standard web platform behavior (or the >>>>>>>> test >>>>>>>> itself is wrong). The files are sometimes harmful because they hide >>>>>>>> failures and web platform incompatibilities (e.g. >>>>>>>> <http://crbug.com/772405>). So I think -expected.txt files for WPT >>>>>>>> tests should be rare and eventually be removed. An -expected.txt >>>>>>>> should not >>>>>>>> be treated as a part of the test itself because a) it doesn't exist in >>>>>>>> upstream WPT and 2) it doesn't describe the standard expected behavior, >>>>>>>> thus isn't necessarily placed besides the test. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The directory name 'platform' may be misleading. 'baselines' may be >>>>>>>> a better name (but we should not rename until we decide what to do for >>>>>>>> generic baselines). For WPT tests, 'failures' is perhaps an even better >>>>>>>> name. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Friday, June 3, 2022 at 6:55:49 AM UTC-7 Dominic Farolino wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> For the long term, we can definitely move this back once we have >>>>>>>>>> separate legacy tests and wpt into different folders. I can also >>>>>>>>>> reach out >>>>>>>>>> to you guys to better understand your needs. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> For the folders Dom mentioned, I can check to see if any of that >>>>>>>>>> can be removed. I understand the README is needed for virtual test >>>>>>>>>> suites. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Can you define "long term" here? Is there a timeline? I was really >>>>>>>>> hoping that we'd go back to how things were almost immediately. Still >>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>> need for the delay does not quite make sense to me, and I'm really >>>>>>>>> hoping that for Blink developer experience we can revert this back to >>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>> previous setup ASAP. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Under "web_tests/virtual" we have baselines for wpt and pure >>>>>>>>>> virtual legacy tests, we can list the folders under "virtual/prefix" >>>>>>>>>> for >>>>>>>>>> each virtual test suite, which will make the dependency very >>>>>>>>>> large(yes), >>>>>>>>>> and we need make such change each time when we add new virtual >>>>>>>>>> suites. I >>>>>>>>>> don't think this is something blink devs want to do. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I'm sorry, but like Domenic I am not sure what to make of much of >>>>>>>>> this. What I do know is that Blink developers also don't want the >>>>>>>>> current >>>>>>>>> WPT writing experience where expectation files are positioned far >>>>>>>>> away from >>>>>>>>> the source test. I think this experience matters a lot. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Thu, Jun 2, 2022 at 4:25 PM Weizhong Xia <[email protected]> >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Previously you don't need to specify anything in BUILD.gn is >>>>>>>>>> because we are downloading the whole "web_tests" folder. Now we want >>>>>>>>>> to run >>>>>>>>>> legacy tests and wpt in different steps. Under "web_tests/virtual" >>>>>>>>>> we have >>>>>>>>>> baselines for wpt and pure virtual legacy tests, we can list the >>>>>>>>>> folders >>>>>>>>>> under "virtual/prefix" for each virtual test suite, which will make >>>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>> dependency very large(yes), and we need make such change each time >>>>>>>>>> when we >>>>>>>>>> add new virtual suites. I don't think this is something blink devs >>>>>>>>>> want to >>>>>>>>>> do. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> The discussion is at the beginning of the crbug. So pls >>>>>>>>>> scroll back to #c1, and read from there. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> thanks, Weizhong >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Jun 2, 2022 at 12:29 PM Domenic Denicola < >>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Jun 2, 2022 at 3:21 PM Weizhong Xia <[email protected]> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Folks >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> I'm sorry to see this has caused inconvenience, and sorry for >>>>>>>>>>>> being late in response to this, due to the same reason Dom had. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Thanks for responding and listening to our concerns! >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> The reason to move baselines to one central place at this point >>>>>>>>>>>> is to make it possible to specify dependency in BUILD.gn. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I don't quite understand this. I've had to work with WPTs and >>>>>>>>>>> WPT expectations my entire time working on Chromium. I've never had >>>>>>>>>>> to >>>>>>>>>>> "specify dependency in BUILD.gn"; I don't really know what that >>>>>>>>>>> means. I'd >>>>>>>>>>> love to hear more (or be referred to a doc explaining the issue), >>>>>>>>>>> so that I >>>>>>>>>>> understand why we're making the sacrifice we're making. (The linked >>>>>>>>>>> bug >>>>>>>>>>> isn't very understandable for me, unfortunately. I can't even >>>>>>>>>>> understand >>>>>>>>>>> enough to find the part you mentioned where you discussed different >>>>>>>>>>> approaches.) >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I'm also unsure how the decision was weighed. Is the population >>>>>>>>>>> of people specifying dependency in BUILD.gn very large, so that >>>>>>>>>>> their needs >>>>>>>>>>> are outweighing those of the Chromium developers working with web >>>>>>>>>>> platform >>>>>>>>>>> tests? >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> This is part of the work to use upstream wptrunner to run wpt >>>>>>>>>>>> tests. In crbug/1299834 <https://crbug.com/1299834> we have >>>>>>>>>>>> tried to discuss some different approaches. I would say this is >>>>>>>>>>>> the least >>>>>>>>>>>> disruptive way. For blink engprod, I think to make blink devs >>>>>>>>>>>> happy is our >>>>>>>>>>>> top priority. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> For the long term, we can definitely move this back once we >>>>>>>>>>>> have separate legacy tests and wpt into different folders. I can >>>>>>>>>>>> also reach >>>>>>>>>>>> out to you guys to better understand your needs. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> For the folders Dom mentioned, I can check to see if any of >>>>>>>>>>>> that can be removed. I understand the README is needed for virtual >>>>>>>>>>>> test >>>>>>>>>>>> suites. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Cheers, Weizhong >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, June 1, 2022 at 6:06:56 AM UTC-7 >>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected] wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> +1 from me as well. I was similarly caught by surprise by this >>>>>>>>>>>>> change (during reviews for webexposed changes), and am similarly >>>>>>>>>>>>> not seeing >>>>>>>>>>>>> the upside for this. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> While I'm sure this is a change that was meant to be a >>>>>>>>>>>>> positive one, I'd love to better understand the reasoning, and >>>>>>>>>>>>> whether the >>>>>>>>>>>>> current situation is a temporary one, or one that is planned to be >>>>>>>>>>>>> permanent even after the move to blink_wpt_tests is done. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, May 27, 2022 at 6:10 PM Domenic Denicola < >>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1. This was really unpleasantly surprising. When I first saw >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the original blink-dev email, I thought "generic baselines" >>>>>>>>>>>>>> meant something >>>>>>>>>>>>>> like "non-web platform test baselines", not "WPT expectation >>>>>>>>>>>>>> files that are >>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform-agnostic". >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> In addition to the context-switching cost, it's just much >>>>>>>>>>>>>> harder to navigate between tests and their expectations, which >>>>>>>>>>>>>> is something >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I do quite often. E.g., they are no longer grouped together in >>>>>>>>>>>>>> code >>>>>>>>>>>>>> reviews, since their file paths are lexicographically far away >>>>>>>>>>>>>> from each >>>>>>>>>>>>>> other. And, as someone maintaining and reviewing several WPT >>>>>>>>>>>>>> directories, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> moving these crucial files out of the directories I commonly >>>>>>>>>>>>>> work in (and >>>>>>>>>>>>>> have metadata marking me as the point-of-contact for) into >>>>>>>>>>>>>> separate >>>>>>>>>>>>>> directories dilutes the cohesiveness of my projects. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, May 27, 2022 at 12:03 PM Dominic Farolino < >>>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I write a lot of web platform tests as a Web Platform >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> engineer; recently I wrote one in external/wpt/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://source.chromium.org/chromium/chromium/src/+/main:third_party/blink/web_tests/external/wpt/> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (the external web platform tests directory), and was shocked to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> find the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> eradication of `-expected.txt` files. I placed my expectations >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> file next to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the source file as we've done for many years, and found that my >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> test was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "failing" because the test runner couldn't find my test >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> expectations file. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I dug deeper and found https://crrev.com/c/3603221 which >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was responsible for moving more than 21,000 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *platform-agnostic* test expectations files away from their >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> source files and into web_tests/platform/generic >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://source.chromium.org/chromium/chromium/src/+/main:third_party/blink/web_tests/platform/generic/> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> directory. I found more discussion in this email thread >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/0WmmgEkqdOo> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> which >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I missed because blink-dev emails do not go directly in my >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> inbox. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I must say I find this change extraordinarily inconvenient >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> as a Web Platform engineer, and I want to push back against >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this. A >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> minority of web platform tests have platform-specific failures, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> which >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> justifies the need for *some* platform-specific test >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> expectations directories, but I believe a huge majority have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> generic >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> baselines that are wildly convenient to have right next to the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> actual tests >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> themselves. Putting them in a separate directory means I and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> others have to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> open a separate browser tab to view how many expectations there >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> are for a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> given directory, and requires a lot of unnecessary context >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> switching. It is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> particularly confusing for clusters of tests whose names are all >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *very* similar and vary by only a few numbers or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> suffixes—this increases the cost of the context switching. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Furthermore, it renders tons of directories absolutely >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> useless! All ~150 directories in web_tests/virtual >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://source.chromium.org/chromium/chromium/src/+/main:third_party/blink/web_tests/virtual/> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> VirtualTestSuites) are just empty directories with README >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> files—these used >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to house virtualtest-specific expectations. So now for fenced >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> frames (the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> project I'm working on right now), we have the following test >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> directories: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - web_tests/wpt_internal/fenced_frame/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://source.chromium.org/chromium/chromium/src/+/main:third_party/blink/web_tests/wpt_internal/fenced_frame/> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - web_tests/virtual/fenced-frame-mparch/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://source.chromium.org/chromium/chromium/src/+/main:third_party/blink/web_tests/virtual/fenced-frame-mparch/> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - web_tests/virtual/fenced-frame-shadow-dom/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://source.chromium.org/chromium/chromium/src/+/main:third_party/blink/web_tests/virtual/fenced-frame-shadow-dom/> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - web_tests/platform/generic/wpt_internal/fenced_frame/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://source.chromium.org/chromium/chromium/src/+/main:third_party/blink/web_tests/platform/generic/wpt_internal/fenced_frame/> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - web_tests/platform/generic/virtual/fenced-frame-mparch/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://source.chromium.org/chromium/chromium/src/+/main:third_party/blink/web_tests/platform/generic/virtual/fenced-frame-mparch/> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> web_tests/platform/generic/virtual/fenced-frame-shadow-dom/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://source.chromium.org/chromium/chromium/src/+/main:third_party/blink/web_tests/platform/generic/virtual/fenced-frame-shadow-dom/> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - + platform-specific directories, which are relatively >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rare for us >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This is so weird! Regardless of whether or not there are >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> plans to clean this up, I can't see the upsides. The ousting of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform-agnostic expectations is only an inconvenience for WP >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> engineers, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> while there might be some test-infra conveniences around >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> BUILD.gn >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dependencies >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=1299834#:~:text=This%20way%20all%20the%20baselines%20will%20be%20in%20platform%20directory%2C%20make%20it%20a%20little%20bit%20easier%20to%20specify%20dependency%20in%20BUILD.gn.> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (maybe?). >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In any case, I am hard pressed to find justification in this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> move, and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> would love to see if we can reconsider this. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thoughts? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dom >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Google Groups "blink-dev" group. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from it, send an email to [email protected]. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAP-uykAN06y5o-WYznnicvm1YREbSsLbs6dM57LtL4vCWB%3Duzw%40mail.gmail.com >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAP-uykAN06y5o-WYznnicvm1YREbSsLbs6dM57LtL4vCWB%3Duzw%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> . >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Google Groups "blink-dev" group. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from >>>>>>>>>>>>>> it, send an email to [email protected]. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAM0wra9jXeotZVYNKBMmW90x36%2BdOCqcqfZ-ZpPW0qJVUBptbQ%40mail.gmail.com >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAM0wra9jXeotZVYNKBMmW90x36%2BdOCqcqfZ-ZpPW0qJVUBptbQ%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> . >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "blink-dev" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to [email protected]. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAM0wra9NteOmPg3xrFp4Oa2at752h1hQY__%3DbcwKGgoeLxOi_A%40mail.gmail.com >> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAM0wra9NteOmPg3xrFp4Oa2at752h1hQY__%3DbcwKGgoeLxOi_A%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >> . >> > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "blink-dev" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CADXrSiozh2E1MgeF%3DV%3Drfr8SEOZhFqtkj4SYkfL22b18%3DZMCHg%40mail.gmail.com.
