On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 3:46 PM, Dirk Pranke <dpra...@chromium.org> wrote: > On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 2:49 PM, Sam Weinig <wei...@apple.com> wrote: >> >> On Mar 7, 2012, at 4:41 PM, Ojan Vafai wrote: >> >> I just did a first pass a greening the Chromium Lion >> bot: http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/110096. Of these hundreds of tests, >> ~99% of them are perfect candidates for being reftests (e.g. they contain >> one line of text and a solid box or two under the text), but most of them >> are in the CSS imported test suites. >> >> Is it kosher to convert them to reftests or should we leave pixel tests from >> imported test suites alone? >> >> >> If we want to make these ref tests, it probably makes more sense to do that >> work with the CSS WG, so that they can be part of the standard test suite. >> Until then, I think we should keep them regular pixel tests. >> > > Note that this thread (to resurrect it just-after-easter because it's > timely) is directly relevant to the note I just sent out about > importing test suites. > > I, at least, would like some clarification ... if we are importing > tests that have no accompanying "expected result" (and are expected to > be inspected manually for correctness), is it acceptable to write > reference html for the tests, or do they have to be imported as pixel > tests? >
Put differently, we either need to add an -expected html or an -expected png. Does it have to be the latter? > I personally think it's acceptable, but I understand that there might > be a difference of opinion. > > https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=72987 is an example of this. > > -- Dirk _______________________________________________ webkit-dev mailing list webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev