<html>
<head>
<base href="https://bugs.webkit.org/" />
</head>
<body>
<p>
<div>
<b><a class="bz_bug_link
bz_status_NEW "
title="NEW - [GTK] WebProcess crashes when quickly attempting many DnD operations"
href="https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=138468#c35">Comment # 35</a>
on <a class="bz_bug_link
bz_status_NEW "
title="NEW - [GTK] WebProcess crashes when quickly attempting many DnD operations"
href="https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=138468">bug 138468</a>
from <span class="vcard"><a class="email" href="mailto:mario@webkit.org" title="Mario Sanchez Prada <mario@webkit.org>"> <span class="fn">Mario Sanchez Prada</span></a>
</span></b>
<pre>(In reply to <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=138468#c34">comment #34</a>)
<span class="quote">> Thanks for removing the timeout from the test. We should only use timeouts
> when absolutely necessary since it makes the test vulnerable to flakiness,
> and significantly slows down the tests.</span >
Agree. Shame on me I put it in the first place, happy to see it go away...
<span class="quote">> At this point, I would stop fighting with the bots and just land this. I
> would file a Mac bug to make this test work, and land it with an expected
> fail in the Mac test expectations, so it might get fixed if someone with a
> Mac is interested. I agree, it's a test that ought to pass on every platform.</span >
It's kind of weird, though, that the ondragend callback is not the only thing failing on the Mac now: when I had the timeout I could also see the prints from every call to runNextStep(), which are gone now as well.
Anyway, I agree it's probably not the most efficient use of time to keep fighting the EWS, but still I'd like to give it one more shot before adding it to the TestExpectations Mac file and calling it a day: tonight I'm hoping to do some investigation on my mac mini, see if I can figure out what's wrong. If after that I still have no clue, then I'll do what you just said.</pre>
</div>
</p>
<hr>
<span>You are receiving this mail because:</span>
<ul>
<li>You are the assignee for the bug.</li>
</ul>
</body>
</html>