Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Sep 19, 2018. It is now read-only.

Add environment scope to test name in case it is not Window #175

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

youennf
Copy link
Contributor

@youennf youennf commented Jan 7, 2016

Making a ''XXX' test name becoming [ Worker] XXX or [ ServiceWorker ] XXX


This change is Reviewable

@hoppipolla-critic-bot
Copy link

Critic review: https://critic.hoppipolla.co.uk/r/6076

This is an external review system which you may optionally use for the code review of your pull request.

In order to help critic track your changes, please do not make in-place history rewrites (e.g. via git rebase -i or git commit --amend) when updating this pull request.

@Ms2ger
Copy link
Contributor

Ms2ger commented Jan 7, 2016

Not quite convinced here/

@youennf
Copy link
Contributor Author

youennf commented Jan 7, 2016

I think it might be of some use once uploading streams API whatwg tests.
@wanderview, @jgraham, any thoughts?

@youennf
Copy link
Contributor Author

youennf commented Jan 7, 2016

Related issue is #168

@youennf
Copy link
Contributor Author

youennf commented Feb 25, 2016

Streams API tests have been uploaded in web-platform-tests repository and illustrate the issue.

Running them on Chrome locally (http://localhost:8000/streams/count-queuing-strategy.https.html e.g.) shows that each test name is duplicated 3 times.
This gives a red warning when running them in a browser.
It is also not straightforward to identify which test result corresponds to which test flavor (window, worker, service worker).

We could update testharness to remove the ambiguity as proposed in the PR.
Or we could update streams tests to split test flavors in different test files, as dismissed in whatwg/streams#411

@Ms2ger, wdyt?

@sideshowbarker
Copy link
Contributor

@Ms2ger this one seems to be waiting on feedback from you

@Ms2ger
Copy link
Contributor

Ms2ger commented Nov 2, 2016

Will defer to @jgraham. This might cause issues all non-Window test expectations to be invalidated...

Possibly using .any.js for those tests would be better.

@jgraham
Copy link
Member

jgraham commented Nov 2, 2016

Yeah, invalidating all test names for non-window tests seems like a bad idea. That data can be regenerated but it isn't trivial to do and it seems like the streams tests could trivially solve this issue themselves.

I guess I should also make the stability bot reject PRs with duplicate test names.

Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants