Re: [dev-servo] Meeting notes 4/27 (Reviewable; blog posts; github/BMO; infra issues; Whistler planning)
On 4/28/15 5:23 AM, David Bruant wrote: Another possibility is for the reporter to make a PR with the test case. Just stop. We're talking about making it _easy_ to report issues, yes? -Boris ___ dev-servo mailing list dev-servo@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-servo
Re: [dev-servo] Meeting notes 4/27 (Reviewable; blog posts; github/BMO; infra issues; Whistler planning)
Migration is a one-time thing, but using a bulkier software, (with plenty of downsides as listed in the notes) when we already have something that works, for the half-year to a year (even perhaps more) it takes for us to scale to a point where we actually need isn't one-time and is the worse option IMO. -Manish Goregaokar ___ dev-servo mailing list dev-servo@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-servo
Re: [dev-servo] Meeting notes 4/27 (Reviewable; blog posts; github/BMO; infra issues; Whistler planning)
On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 7:32 PM, Manish Goregaokar manishsm...@gmail.com wrote: But I think that as long as the glove still fits, we should use it. Perhaps reevaluate when we start shipping something (Rust-in-Gecko is already being tracked on Bugzilla and we' probably should continue with that); but for now I don't see much of a reason to migrate, aside from avoiding having to migrate a larger Servo in the future. Isn't that a good reason? Rob -- oIo otoeololo oyooouo otohoaoto oaonoyooonoeo owohooo oioso oaonogoroyo owoiotoho oao oboroootohoeoro oooro osoiosotoeoro owoiololo oboeo osouobojoeocoto otooo ojouodogomoeonoto.o oAogoaoiono,o oaonoyooonoeo owohooo osoaoyoso otooo oao oboroootohoeoro oooro osoiosotoeoro,o o‘oRoaocoao,o’o oioso oaonosowoeoroaoboloeo otooo otohoeo ocooouoroto.o oAonodo oaonoyooonoeo owohooo osoaoyoso,o o‘oYooouo ofolo!o’o owoiololo oboeo oiono odoaonogoeoro ooofo otohoeo ofoioroeo ooofo ohoeololo. ___ dev-servo mailing list dev-servo@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-servo
Re: [dev-servo] Meeting notes 4/27 (Reviewable; blog posts; github/BMO; infra issues; Whistler planning)
On 4/28/15 10:33 AM, Jack Moffitt wrote: This is an issue, but hasn't hit us much yet. Sure. I assume if it had you would have been dealing with it. ;) It's easy enough to use the ``` syntax to include arbitrary things into a bug report. This is how we often attach logs and such. You can't directly read it from Servo since it's inline in the bug text, but cut and paste is pretty simple and these are small test cases right? :) That fails once you have images involved, unless the reporter converts them to data: URIs. This also fails in various cases that involve strings github may not be able to represent (invalid characters, etc). I agree that it can work in a lot of cases, of course. It's also pretty easy to make a gist (gist.github.com) of whatever you like and link to that from the bug. Ah, I should look into this more. That might be enough. -Boris ___ dev-servo mailing list dev-servo@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-servo
Re: [dev-servo] Meeting notes 4/27 (Reviewable; blog posts; github/BMO; infra issues; Whistler planning)
On 4/27/15 8:38 PM, Josh Matthews wrote: https://github.com/servo/servo/wiki/Meeting-2015-04-27 I've mentioned this a few times, but... For a layout engine, being able to attach an actual testcase to a bug report is _really_ useful once you get out of just build it mode and into fix all the bugs in this thing you built mode. Github issues simply have no way to do this that I've been able to find. You can put testcases on jsfiddle or other such services, but it's really hard to do minimal testcases that way because of all the things those services pull in, it's impossible to test some things (e.g. parser issues, quirks mode) because there's little control over the markup, and there are absolutely no guarantees your testcase will be around in 5 years when you want to see what that code change was trying to fix. This is really a problem I expect you'll want to solve at some point if you want to be able to get useful functionality bug reports and community QA. -Boris ___ dev-servo mailing list dev-servo@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-servo
Re: [dev-servo] Meeting notes 4/27 (Reviewable; blog posts; github/BMO; infra issues; Whistler planning)
On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 4:52 PM, Boris Zbarsky bzbar...@mit.edu wrote: For a layout engine, being able to attach an actual testcase to a bug report is _really_ useful once you get out of just build it mode and into fix all the bugs in this thing you built mode. Github issues simply have no way to do this that I've been able to find. You can put testcases on jsfiddle or other such services, but it's really hard to do minimal testcases that way because of all the things those services pull in, it's impossible to test some things (e.g. parser issues, quirks mode) because there's little control over the markup, and there are absolutely no guarantees your testcase will be around in 5 years when you want to see what that code change was trying to fix. This is really a problem I expect you'll want to solve at some point if you want to be able to get useful functionality bug reports and community QA. Developers can commit testcases to a github repo and reference them with github.io URLs, but that's no good for casual (e.g. web-developer level) bug reporters. So, yes indeed. Rob -- oIo otoeololo oyooouo otohoaoto oaonoyooonoeo owohooo oioso oaonogoroyo owoiotoho oao oboroootohoeoro oooro osoiosotoeoro owoiololo oboeo osouobojoeocoto otooo ojouodogomoeonoto.o oAogoaoiono,o oaonoyooonoeo owohooo osoaoyoso otooo oao oboroootohoeoro oooro osoiosotoeoro,o o‘oRoaocoao,o’o oioso oaonosowoeoroaoboloeo otooo otohoeo ocooouoroto.o oAonodo oaonoyooonoeo owohooo osoaoyoso,o o‘oYooouo ofolo!o’o owoiololo oboeo oiono odoaonogoeoro ooofo otohoeo ofoioroeo ooofo ohoeololo. ___ dev-servo mailing list dev-servo@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-servo
