Rebaseline css2.1/t040304-c64-uri-00-a-g.html

Rebaseline css2.1/t040304-c64-uri-00-a-g.html

Rebaseline failing layout test and remove it from TestExpectations.
From manually inspecting the test results, it seems the difference
is in the font of the output text, and not the core of the
expectation, that the three backgrounds of the text are green.

BUG=685951
Review-Url: https://codereview.chromium.org/2809593002
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#465482}
Committed: https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/8d60ce0f354a569aaef18dd9547171a483b31525

[suzyh_UTC10 (ex-contributor), 2017-04-11 04:47:59]

Description was changed from

==========
Expect t040304-c64-uri-00-a-g.html to pass

Removing the flake listing from TestExpectations in order to manually
rebase.

BUG=685951
==========

to

==========
Rebaseline css2.1/t040304-c64-uri-00-a-g.html

Rebaseline failing layout test and remove it from TestExpectations.
From manually inspecting the test results, it seems the difference
is in the font of the output text, and not the core of the
expectation, that the three backgrounds of the text are green.

BUG=685951
==========

[suzyh_UTC10 (ex-contributor), 2017-04-11 04:47:59]

suzyh@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ rbyers@chromium.org

[suzyh_UTC10 (ex-contributor), 2017-04-11 04:49:28]

Hi Rick,

I was looking into this failing test and think rebaselining it is the way to go
here. But then in looking at the README in the directory
(https://cs.chromium.org/chromium/src/third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/css2.1/RE...)
these tests are supposed to be a W3C test suite. So, sending it to you for a
first pass. Does this folder of tests even still belong here? Who would be
responsible for reviewing/maintaining these tests?

[suzyh_UTC10 (ex-contributor), 2017-04-11 04:49:33]

The CQ bit was checked by suzyh@chromium.org to run a CQ dry run

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-04-11 04:50:01]

Dry run: CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 
https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/v2/patch-status/codereview.chromium.or...

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-04-11 05:48:29]

The CQ bit was unchecked by commit-bot@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-04-11 05:48:31]

Dry run: This issue passed the CQ dry run.

[suzyh_UTC10 (ex-contributor), 2017-04-18 06:05:22]

Ping rbyers: Any thoughts? Thanks!

[Rick Byers, 2017-04-18 06:20:11]

Description was changed from

==========
Rebaseline css2.1/t040304-c64-uri-00-a-g.html

Rebaseline failing layout test and remove it from TestExpectations.
From manually inspecting the test results, it seems the difference
is in the font of the output text, and not the core of the
expectation, that the three backgrounds of the text are green.

BUG=685951
==========

to

==========
Rebaseline css2.1/t040304-c64-uri-00-a-g.html

Rebaseline failing layout test and remove it from TestExpectations.
From manually inspecting the test results, it seems the difference
is in the font of the output text, and not the core of the
expectation, that the three backgrounds of the text are green.

BUG=685951
==========

[Rick Byers, 2017-04-18 06:24:00]

On 2017/04/18 06:05:22, suzyh_UTC10 wrote:
> Ping rbyers: Any thoughts? Thanks!

Sorry I missed this!  I have no idea where these tests came from.  The W3C CSS
tests are now in LayoutTests/external/wpt/css/ though we're not implementing
many.  I don't see these tests in the upstream CSS test repo, so perhaps they're
obsolete now?  +gsnedders who should know.

Regardless I don't see any harm in updating these, so LGTM.  But if gsnedders
says it's OK then I'd just remove the directory entirely (though we may want to
import some more of the WPT directories first to be sure we're not loosing any
coverage).

[gsnedders, 2017-04-18 19:03:11]

On 18/04/17 07:24, rbyers@chromium.org wrote:
> On 2017/04/18 06:05:22, suzyh_UTC10 wrote:
>> Ping rbyers: Any thoughts? Thanks!
> 
> Sorry I missed this! I have no idea where these tests came from. The W3C CSS
> tests are now in LayoutTests/external/wpt/css/ though we're not implementing
> many. I don't see these tests in the upstream CSS test repo, so perhaps
> they're
> obsolete now? +gsnedders who should know.
> 
> Regardless I don't see any harm in updating these, so LGTM. But if gsnedders
> says it's OK then I'd just remove the directory entirely (though we may
> want to
> import some more of the WPT directories first to be sure we're not
> loosing any
> coverage).
> 
> https://codereview.chromium.org/2809593002/

The filename is reminiscent of the old CSS1 testsuite with its cNN. So,
uh, let's try looking for that…

And css/CSS2/css1/c64-uri-000.xht would appear to be it.

We can probably kill the entirety of the old css2.1 testsuite directory
given it's from 2006/2011. I don't think there's any value in having old
static dumps? That said, I think we'd have to import more of css/CSS2 to
make sure we weren't losing coverage (doing so, we'd move to having more
of the tests being reftests, which would be good), though it seems like
a fairly arbitrary subset of the total testsuite (and given the size of
the 2.1 testsuite the concerns about importing it all at once come up
again).

Matching up those from css2.1/20110323 to the current testsuite should
be easy as the filenames are unlikely to have changed; those directly in
css2.1 will be far harder.

/g

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Blink
Reviews" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to blink-reviews+unsubscribe@chromium.org.

[gsnedders, 2017-04-18 19:03:12]

On 18/04/17 07:24, rbyers@chromium.org wrote:
> On 2017/04/18 06:05:22, suzyh_UTC10 wrote:
>> Ping rbyers: Any thoughts? Thanks!
> 
> Sorry I missed this! I have no idea where these tests came from. The W3C CSS
> tests are now in LayoutTests/external/wpt/css/ though we're not implementing
> many. I don't see these tests in the upstream CSS test repo, so perhaps
> they're
> obsolete now? +gsnedders who should know.
> 
> Regardless I don't see any harm in updating these, so LGTM. But if gsnedders
> says it's OK then I'd just remove the directory entirely (though we may
> want to
> import some more of the WPT directories first to be sure we're not
> loosing any
> coverage).
> 
> https://codereview.chromium.org/2809593002/

The filename is reminiscent of the old CSS1 testsuite with its cNN. So,
uh, let's try looking for that…

And css/CSS2/css1/c64-uri-000.xht would appear to be it.

We can probably kill the entirety of the old css2.1 testsuite directory
given it's from 2006/2011. I don't think there's any value in having old
static dumps? That said, I think we'd have to import more of css/CSS2 to
make sure we weren't losing coverage (doing so, we'd move to having more
of the tests being reftests, which would be good), though it seems like
a fairly arbitrary subset of the total testsuite (and given the size of
the 2.1 testsuite the concerns about importing it all at once come up
again).

Matching up those from css2.1/20110323 to the current testsuite should
be easy as the filenames are unlikely to have changed; those directly in
css2.1 will be far harder.

/g

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Chromium-reviews" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to chromium-reviews+unsubscribe@chromium.org.

[suzyh_UTC10 (ex-contributor), 2017-04-18 23:51:50]

Thanks for the input. I'll go ahead and submit this. Please file a bug to track
checking coverage and deleting the obsolete tests. Would you guys own that bug
to start with?

[suzyh_UTC10 (ex-contributor), 2017-04-18 23:51:56]

The CQ bit was checked by suzyh@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-04-18 23:52:36]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 
https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/v2/patch-status/codereview.chromium.or...

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-04-19 01:06:35]

The CQ bit was unchecked by commit-bot@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-04-19 01:06:36]

Try jobs failed on following builders:
  linux_chromium_rel_ng on master.tryserver.chromium.linux (JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.linux/builders/linux_chromium_...)

[Rick Byers, 2017-04-19 03:06:29]

On 2017/04/18 23:51:50, suzyh_UTC10 wrote:
> Thanks for the input. I'll go ahead and submit this. Please file a bug to
track
> checking coverage and deleting the obsolete tests. 

Done: https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=712950

> Would you guys own that bug
> to start with?

Nope, sorry - we're just a couple people there's no way we can own the interop
tests for all blink features (and usually feature-specific context is necessary
anyway).  Individual feature teams own their own testing strategy (be it
chromium or web-platform-tests).  We (platform-predictability@) own the
infrastructure to make it as easy as possible for you and can provide advice /
assistance.

[suzyh_UTC10 (ex-contributor), 2017-04-19 03:17:00]

The CQ bit was checked by suzyh@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-04-19 03:17:14]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 
https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/v2/patch-status/codereview.chromium.or...

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-04-19 03:20:20]

CQ is committing da patch.

Bot data: {"patchset_id": 20001, "attempt_start_ts": 1492571820300720,
"parent_rev": "e012eb7d8849c55a50689509a81eb0a9588485da", "commit_rev":
"8d60ce0f354a569aaef18dd9547171a483b31525"}

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-04-19 03:20:36]

Description was changed from

==========
Rebaseline css2.1/t040304-c64-uri-00-a-g.html

Rebaseline failing layout test and remove it from TestExpectations.
From manually inspecting the test results, it seems the difference
is in the font of the output text, and not the core of the
expectation, that the three backgrounds of the text are green.

BUG=685951
==========

to

==========
Rebaseline css2.1/t040304-c64-uri-00-a-g.html

Rebaseline failing layout test and remove it from TestExpectations.
From manually inspecting the test results, it seems the difference
is in the font of the output text, and not the core of the
expectation, that the three backgrounds of the text are green.

BUG=685951

Review-Url: https://codereview.chromium.org/2809593002
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#465482}
Committed:
https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/8d60ce0f354a569aaef18dd95471...
==========

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-04-19 03:20:37]

Committed patchset #2 (id:20001) as
https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/8d60ce0f354a569aaef18dd95471...