Re: [webkit-dev] do you want WK1 and WK2 keywords in the TestExpectations files?
On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 8:59 PM, Raphael Kubo da Costa rak...@webkit.orgwrote: Dirk Pranke dpra...@chromium.org writes: So, it seems like WK1 and WK2 keywords might be useful. However, I don't really want to add more divergence between ports, so it would be nice to have everyone agree to use it if we were to add it. What do you all think? Would you like this feature, and would you all use it ? At least on the EFL side I think things are good the way they are: we have platform/efl for common stuff and platform/efl-wk1 and platform/efl-wk2 for WK1- or WK2-specific stuff (not only TestExpectations files but also test results). If we got rid of those and put everything together in platform/efl, I think we'd end up with a very big TestExpectations file and don't know what we'd do with the occasional different results for WK1 and WK2. I'm pushing for the same hierarchy for the GTK port in https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=97562 I also agree that keeping all expectations in one TestExpectations file and using WK1/WK2 modifiers would bloat that file and considerably affect efficient work with it. Personally, I don't have any need for these additional modifiers, I'd rather see wk1- and wk2-specific fallback directories with their own TestExpectations. While not strictly related to this, I'd also like someday see Chromium port moving to a similar organisation of their baselines, in place of using many platform modifiers which could then be removed. -Z However, this is a little awkward and gets worse if you also need to support different expectations for multiple different configs (e.g., mac-lion vs mac-snowleopard vs mac-mountainlion). It wouldn't really solve this problem, right? -- Intel Finland Oy Registered Address: PL 281, 00181 Helsinki Business Identity Code: 0357606 - 4 Domiciled in Helsinki ___ webkit-dev mailing list webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev ___ webkit-dev mailing list webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev
[webkit-dev] do you want WK1 and WK2 keywords in the TestExpectations files?
Hi all, I occasionally get asked if the TestExpectations syntax supports a way to distinguish different results for WebKit1 and WebKit2 via keywords. We currently don't do this, and different ports have worked around this in slightly different ways by using dedicated wk2-specific TestExpectations files and sometimes wk1-specific TestExpectations files. However, this is a little awkward and gets worse if you also need to support different expectations for multiple different configs (e.g., mac-lion vs mac-snowleopard vs mac-mountainlion). So, it seems like WK1 and WK2 keywords might be useful. However, I don't really want to add more divergence between ports, so it would be nice to have everyone agree to use it if we were to add it. What do you all think? Would you like this feature, and would you all use it ? (Since I don't regularly switch between WK1 and WK2 I don't have a strong feeling here beyond what I've written above). -- Dirk ___ webkit-dev mailing list webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev
Re: [webkit-dev] do you want WK1 and WK2 keywords in the TestExpectations files?
I don't have strong opinions on this, but one advantage of using the keywords and getting rid of the dedicated TestExpectations files would be to make the fallback graph actually be a tree instead of a DAG. This would simplify the rebaselining tooling considerably and allow us to make a bunch of cases work better that don't work great right now. On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 11:41 AM, Dirk Pranke dpra...@chromium.org wrote: Hi all, I occasionally get asked if the TestExpectations syntax supports a way to distinguish different results for WebKit1 and WebKit2 via keywords. We currently don't do this, and different ports have worked around this in slightly different ways by using dedicated wk2-specific TestExpectations files and sometimes wk1-specific TestExpectations files. However, this is a little awkward and gets worse if you also need to support different expectations for multiple different configs (e.g., mac-lion vs mac-snowleopard vs mac-mountainlion). So, it seems like WK1 and WK2 keywords might be useful. However, I don't really want to add more divergence between ports, so it would be nice to have everyone agree to use it if we were to add it. What do you all think? Would you like this feature, and would you all use it ? (Since I don't regularly switch between WK1 and WK2 I don't have a strong feeling here beyond what I've written above). -- Dirk ___ webkit-dev mailing list webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev ___ webkit-dev mailing list webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev
Re: [webkit-dev] do you want WK1 and WK2 keywords in the TestExpectations files?
Dirk Pranke dpra...@chromium.org writes: So, it seems like WK1 and WK2 keywords might be useful. However, I don't really want to add more divergence between ports, so it would be nice to have everyone agree to use it if we were to add it. What do you all think? Would you like this feature, and would you all use it ? At least on the EFL side I think things are good the way they are: we have platform/efl for common stuff and platform/efl-wk1 and platform/efl-wk2 for WK1- or WK2-specific stuff (not only TestExpectations files but also test results). If we got rid of those and put everything together in platform/efl, I think we'd end up with a very big TestExpectations file and don't know what we'd do with the occasional different results for WK1 and WK2. However, this is a little awkward and gets worse if you also need to support different expectations for multiple different configs (e.g., mac-lion vs mac-snowleopard vs mac-mountainlion). It wouldn't really solve this problem, right? -- Intel Finland Oy Registered Address: PL 281, 00181 Helsinki Business Identity Code: 0357606 - 4 Domiciled in Helsinki ___ webkit-dev mailing list webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev
Re: [webkit-dev] do you want WK1 and WK2 keywords in the TestExpectations files?
On Nov 13, 2012, at 12:29 PM, Dirk Pranke dpra...@chromium.org wrote: We pretty much have this today (with platform/wk2 and platform/mac-wk2). You're saying you'd prefer to add platform/wk1, platform/mac-wk1, platform/mac-lion-wk1, and platform/mac-lion-wk2 if/where necessary (and no keywords), right? I would prefer it to adding keywords. -- Darin ___ webkit-dev mailing list webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev
Re: [webkit-dev] do you want WK1 and WK2 keywords in the TestExpectations files?
On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 12:29 PM, Dirk Pranke dpra...@chromium.org wrote: On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 12:13 PM, Darin Adler da...@apple.com wrote: I’d prefer an directory-based overlay/inheritance approach to sharing WebKit1- vs. WebKit2-specific expectations over in-file keywords. I’d like to share more than just a central expectations file, so we could share expected results or even WebKit1 or WebKit2-specific tests. We pretty much have this today (with platform/wk2 and platform/mac-wk2). You're saying you'd prefer to add platform/wk1, platform/mac-wk1, platform/mac-lion-wk1, and platform/mac-lion-wk2 if/where necessary (and no keywords), right? One specific example to motivate this ... imagine a test that we want to skip everywhere except current (and future) mac wk2. This would require a Skip in platform/mac/TestExpectations, a Pass in platform/mac-wk2/TestExpectations, and then a Skip in (a newly created, since we don't currently have this) platform/mac-lion-wk2/TestExpectations. -- Dirk ___ webkit-dev mailing list webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev
