On 10/09/14 19:32, Aryeh Gregor wrote: > On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 3:44 PM, James Graham <ja...@hoppipolla.co.uk> wrote: >> Yes, I agree too. One option I had considered was making a suite >> "web-platform-tests-mozilla" for things that we can't push upstream e.g. >> because the APIs aren't (yet) undergoing meaningful standardisation. >> Putting the editing tests into this bucket might make some sense. > > That definitely sounds like a great idea, but I think it would be even > better if upstream had a place for these tests, so we could share them > with other engines (and hopefully they would reciprocate). Anyone > who's just interested in conformance test figures would be free not to > run these extra tests, of course. I don't see why upstream would mind > hosting these tests.
I tend to agree, but I suggest that you bring this up on public-test-infra. > In the longer term, I think it would be very interesting if all simple > mochitests were written in a shareable format, and if other engines > did similarly. I imagine we'd find lots of interesting regressions if > we ran a large chunk of WebKit/Blink tests as part of our regular test > suite, even if many of the tests will expect the wrong results from > our perspective. Yes, insofar as "written in a sharable format" means "written in one of the formats that is accepted into wpt". We should strive to make sharing our tests just as fundamental a part of our culture as working with open standards is today. _______________________________________________ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
