On 05/31/2012 04:53 PM, Caio Marcelo de Oliveira Filho wrote:
Hello,
Thanks for the replies here and IRC, folks!
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 7:43 PM, Kenneth Rohde Christiansen
<[email protected]> wrote:
To question (2) Liberation font, I think it is a good idea to make the
switch. But should we do that before the other fix? or does it make
more sense to do both together?
I think we should do together. The intermediate step would be a huge
amount of work that would have to be repeated again when changing the
font.
On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 10:07 AM, Osztrogonac Csaba
<[email protected]> wrote:
And will Qt 4.8, Qt 5.0 WK1 and Qt 5.0 WK2 testresults match after this
change?
Now our problem is that Qt 4.8 and Qt 5.0 WK2 results match, but Qt 5.0 WK1
is different. Or it would be different without elproxy's testfonts hack.
Based on some samples I think they will. I'll do another round of
testing with the Liberation fonts soon.
So landing all new baselines would take days. (And otherwise we should
check them one by one to avoid accidentally commit wrong expected files
and hide new bugs.) In this case skipping tests for 1-2-3 days are
absolutely reasonable.
OK!
Just noting here that having to checking Qt 4.8 too will make this
take longer... :-P
Just a question. What kind of (test)fonts use the other ports? Apple? GTK?
Chromium?
Chromium requires a lot of fonts for testing, but the basic trio is
the MS Core Fonts. GTK uses Liberation family.
I don't know about Apple, but my guess is they have MS Core Fonts in
the system as well, so they can use that.
Will our results be closer to them with this change? And what about Qt-Mac
port?
AFAIK Qt Mac use the same font code path as Qt Linux, is this correct? (elproxy)
In theory they should look a like, but I didn't investigate Qt Mac
specifically yet.
Maybe in WebKit it's the same code path but the Qt path and the actual
backend is different (linux: fontconfig+freetype, mac: coretext). In
fact we don't even have a way to set up test fonts on Mac. I started
working on this: https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=80272.
<https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=80272> I don't think this
should stop us from this testfont rework. If I'm not wrong there are not
much passing rendertree test on Mac anyway.
Ossy, another issue: currently we have some outdated *-expected.png
files hanging around the platform/qt. I say outdated because I don't
think they pass anymore based on my tests, the history, and the fact
that we don't do pixel tests. What's the approach here: do we generate
new versions of the ones that exist again? We get rid of them until we
have a bot running pixel tests? In the IRC people mentioned they are
good for reference purposes, but I think the other platforms updated
results could serve better as a reference than this.
I agree on that. It doesn't make sense to store outdated png's in the
tree. That just confuses people.
_______________________________________________
webkit-qt mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-qt
