Summary: | fullscreen/video-controls is too specific to the mac port | ||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Product: | WebKit | Reporter: | Philippe Normand <pnormand> | ||||||||
Component: | Media | Assignee: | Philippe Normand <pnormand> | ||||||||
Status: | RESOLVED FIXED | ||||||||||
Severity: | Normal | CC: | dglazkov, eric.carlson, webkit.review.bot | ||||||||
Priority: | P2 | ||||||||||
Version: | 528+ (Nightly build) | ||||||||||
Hardware: | Unspecified | ||||||||||
OS: | Unspecified | ||||||||||
Attachments: |
|
Description
Philippe Normand
2011-12-01 12:47:24 PST
Created attachment 117462 [details]
proposed patch
Comment on attachment 117462 [details]
proposed patch
It’s normally important to have failure vs. success in a test. Is there anything we can do to make this a pass/fail test instead of one that logs the height?
Maybe we can test height >= 0. Would we reach concensus with this? :) (In reply to comment #3) > Maybe we can test height >= 0. Would we reach concensus with this? :) I'm willing to update the test if Eric agrees with this. "height >= 0" doesn't seem especially useful, can height ever be negative? I assume that a platform will have fullscreen controls if this test is now skipped, so how about testing that height is greater than a small but reasonable value (10?, 20?)? (In reply to comment #5) > "height >= 0" doesn't seem especially useful, can height ever be negative? I assume that a platform will have fullscreen controls if this test is now skipped, so how about testing that height is greater than a small but reasonable value (10?, 20?)? Alright, 20 seems good enough to me. I'll update the patch! Created attachment 130399 [details]
Patch
Comment on attachment 130399 [details] Patch Attachment 130399 [details] did not pass chromium-ews (chromium-xvfb): Output: http://queues.webkit.org/results/11833497 New failing tests: fullscreen/video-controls-override.html Created attachment 130415 [details]
Patch
Committed r110025: <http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/110025> |