[webkit-dev] "Tools/Scripts/webkit-patch rebaseline-expectations" does not launch html comparison page?

[Elliot Poger]

How do the gardeners do the rebaselining currently?  It seems like what I'm
looking for is pretty much akin to gardening...

I have looked at
http://www.chromium.org/developers/how-tos/webkit-gardening, but I
have no idea if it is current.

On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 3:31 PM, Dirk Pranke <dpranke at chromium.org> wrote:

> On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 12:24 PM, Adam Barth <abarth at webkit.org> wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 12:20 PM, Tony Chang <tony at chromium.org> wrote:
> >> On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 12:00 PM, Elliot Poger <epoger at chromium.org>
> wrote:
> >>> Perhaps I should approach this from a different angle:
> >>> What is the recommended procedure for:
> >>> - generating new baseline images for a few dozen failing tests, on
> various
> >>> platforms
> >>
> >> webkit-patch rebaseline-expectations
> >>
> >>> - visually inspecting them to make sure they're not bogus
> >>
> >> Would 'webkit-patch pretty-diff' work for you?  It should show the files
> >> being added/deleted, but it won't generate a pixel diff.
> >
> > The tricky part is that this view requires you to understand all the
> > fallback behavior among different ports.  My sense is that this would
> > be easier if we had a smarter view that understood that and presented
> > it to the user in an understandable way.  Unfortunately, no one has
> > built that view yet.
>
> rebaseline-chromium-webkit-tests had some careful logging to stdout
> that explained what files were (or weren't) being updated and why
> (i.e., I claim that I had solved this problem in that script. Although
> it wasn't presented in the HTML, that wouldn't have been that hard to
> add).
>
> I think if we could get the equivalent into the new tool, and if we
> could separate the update and optimize steps, that would probably be
> good enough. I think combining update and optimize makes it *very*
> hard to determine the correctness of what you've done.
>
> In other words, my ideal workflow would be update --> review & approve
> --> optimize --> [optionally review optimze?] --> land.
>
> -- Dirk
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.webkit.org/pipermail/webkit-dev/attachments/20111108/9d215fa7/attachment.html>