[webkit-dev] Another WPT bite

[Simon Fraser]

> On May 9, 2017, at 11:10 AM, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs at apple.com> wrote:
> 
>> On May 9, 2017, at 8:11 AM, Geoffrey Garen <ggaren at apple.com <mailto:ggaren at apple.com>> wrote:
>> 
>>> What we're suggesting is to give preferential treatments to
>>> testharness.js over js-test.js / js-test-pre.js when you were already
>>> planning to write a test with the latter two scripts.
>> 
>> OK, I think this makes sense.
>> 
>> But I still think the very best kind of test is a flat file with 10-20 lines of code in it. Particularly for debugging JavaScript issues, large wrapper frameworks get in the way.
>> 
>>> - Tests would be more easily upstreamable to web-platform-tests, which are run by all major browser engines. This would help a lot in terms of interoperability. As previously discussed, Gecko and Blink already do automated export of tests to web-platform-tests. I believe we should do in the same direction and contribute more tests back.
>> 
>> I wonder why these other projects do automated export instead of incorporating testharness.js directly.
> 
> I don't think that's an "also", not an "instead". My understanding is that they do two-way sync with the web-platform-tests GitHub, so there's a process for downloading tests and upstreaming tests authored by their team. But they still have their own copy.

Another consideration here is "would my test be useful for other browser vendors". I don't think the answer is a unanimous "yes", so I think we should only use WPT for tests that will think are worth sharing.

I'm also concerned that with 4 vendors upstreaming their WPT tests, the WPT repo will just become a morass of partially overlapping tests that takes 4x longer to run than a curated repo.

Simon


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.webkit.org/pipermail/webkit-dev/attachments/20170509/3654e4b5/attachment.html>