On Sat, Aug 22, 2009 at 9:37 PM, Peter Kasting <[email protected]>wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 22, 2009 at 7:49 PM, Jeremy Orlow <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On Sat, Aug 22, 2009 at 5:54 PM, Peter Kasting <[email protected]>wrote: >> >>> Notes in test_expectations.txt are like comments in source code: A great >>> boon. >>> >> >> I've herd differing opinions, but you're the definitely the most gung-ho >> I've talked to about notes in the test_expectations.txt file. Typically >> bugs are where most if not all of the information on failures should be >> kept. If there is information in the test_expectations.txt file, it should >> certainly be a subset of the information in the bugs, would you not agree? >> > > Yes, that is ideal. One nice thing about comments in the test_expectations > file is that unlike comments in bugs, they're (a) hard to miss and (b) > unlikely to be drowned by a sea of bugdroid comments and other spew. Also, > frequently tests with completely different failures get grouped into one bug > ("merge failures r1-r2") and comments on the tests can help add clarity > (although splitting these into multiple bugs is also advisable). > Agreed. It can be hard to triage new test failures while rolling the WebKit deps, which is the cause for many of the large bugs. Hopefully most of these have gotten broken up over time (typically by the person who created them). It might be worth going through all the LayoutTest bugs and double check they're split up into individual root causes (or something approximating that). I'll try to make time to do a scan in the next week or so, but it'd be great if anyone else had time to help. :-) --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Chromium Developers mailing list: [email protected] View archives, change email options, or unsubscribe: http://groups.google.com/group/chromium-dev -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
