Jeff has just created a document to explore what this tool might look like:
https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=691653#c3 Youenn, this sounds like it's right up your alley! On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 11:44 AM, youenn fablet <youe...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Mike, > > Thanks for the information. > It is really great to see Safari be integrated in the bots :) > https://cs.chromium.org/chromium/src/third_party/WebKit/Tools/Scripts/webkitpy/w3c/wpt_github.py > seems like a really good potential candidate for WPT upstream. > y > > Le ven. 28 avr. 2017 à 08:25, Mike Pennisi <m...@bocoup.com> a écrit : >> >> Hi Youenn. My name is Mike, and I've been working with Google for the past >> 4 >> months or so to improve various aspects of the Web Platform Tests >> project (more >> on that here [1]). >> >> > The only constraint I know of is that the test does not give flaky >> tests from >> > WPT Chrome/Firefox bots. >> >> The full set of validation steps are described in the project's >> `.travis.yml` >> file [2]. That's a bit tough to read even if you're familiar with >> TravisCI (we're >> working on it!), but from WebKit's perspective, the only other relevant >> check >> is for file linting. It's not very opinionated (mostly limited to >> objective >> concerns) but still something to be aware of. >> >> Also note that we're very close to including both Edge and Safari in the >> set of >> browsers used to identify flaky tests! [3] >> >> >> > We do not have yet the tooling to automate the creation of a WPT >> GitHub PR >> > from a WebKit patch that lands. >> >> I've recently been migrating tests for Service Workers from the Chromium >> project to WPT. The process in place there is pretty slick. (Context for >> other >> folks on the list: it's able to create commits that exclude >> Chromium-specific >> files [4] and then submit GitHub pull requests from those, merging when CI >> passes [5]. The patch Youenn mentioned is based on those files.) >> >> I'm wondering if we can avoid duplicating effort by making a standalone >> tool. >> It might even be the kind of thing we could host in the W3C GitHub >> organization--whose to say that Edge (for example) wouldn't benefit from >> that, >> too? I would love to be involved in that implementation. >> >> But I'm getting ahead of myself :) I've CC'd Jeff Carp and Quinten >> Yearsley of >> the Chromium team since they are currently working with that tooling. >> >> So what do you folks think? Would it be practical to share code like this? >> >> [1] https://bocoup.com/blog/diving-into-the-web-platform-tests >> [2] https://github.com/w3c/web-platform-tests/blob/master/.travis.yml >> [3] https://github.com/w3c/web-platform-tests/pull/5231 >> [4] >> >> https://cs.chromium.org/chromium/src/third_party/WebKit/Tools/Scripts/webkitpy/w3c/chromium_commit.py >> [5] >> >> https://cs.chromium.org/chromium/src/third_party/WebKit/Tools/Scripts/webkitpy/w3c/wpt_github.py >> >> _______________________________________________ >> webkit-dev mailing list >> webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org >> https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev _______________________________________________ webkit-dev mailing list webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev