Modern IDB: .js test files should not log database names This is because the database name will be different based on if the html for the test changes filename, which will happen in https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=153179
This will be one simple change to a shared js file, followed by lots of updated test results.
Created attachment 269151 [details] Patch v1
Comment on attachment 269151 [details] Patch v1 But if we're going to have two identical copies of all the w3c tests, why don't we do the same with these? r=me if not. These include some imported mozilla tests. Are there more mozilla tests, or will we ever re-import those?
Comment on attachment 269151 [details] Patch v1 Attachment 269151 [details] did not pass mac-wk2-ews (mac-wk2): Output: http://webkit-queues.webkit.org/results/697352 Number of test failures exceeded the failure limit.
Created attachment 269152 [details] Archive of layout-test-results from ews107 for mac-yosemite-wk2 The attached test failures were seen while running run-webkit-tests on the mac-wk2-ews. Bot: ews107 Port: mac-yosemite-wk2 Platform: Mac OS X 10.10.5
Comment on attachment 269151 [details] Patch v1 Attachment 269151 [details] did not pass mac-ews (mac): Output: http://webkit-queues.webkit.org/results/697354 New failing tests: storage/indexeddb/request-result-cache.html
Created attachment 269153 [details] Archive of layout-test-results from ews101 for mac-yosemite The attached test failures were seen while running run-webkit-tests on the mac-ews. Bot: ews101 Port: mac-yosemite Platform: Mac OS X 10.10.5
Comment on attachment 269151 [details] Patch v1 Attachment 269151 [details] did not pass mac-debug-ews (mac): Output: http://webkit-queues.webkit.org/results/697346 New failing tests: storage/indexeddb/request-result-cache.html
Created attachment 269154 [details] Archive of layout-test-results from ews116 for mac-yosemite The attached test failures were seen while running run-webkit-tests on the mac-debug-ews. Bot: ews116 Port: mac-yosemite Platform: Mac OS X 10.10.5
And we will need more test expectations for the private tests anyways. Couldn't those just have a different name in the expectations?
(In reply to comment #3) > Comment on attachment 269151 [details] > Patch v1 > > But if we're going to have two identical copies of all the w3c tests, why > don't we do the same with these? r=me if not. Because having the two identical copies of the w3c tests is *not* ideal. It would be ideal if every single test had a common js file with two thin html wrappers. That way any edits to the tests involve touching one js file and not two html files. That's what this patch is moving towards. > These include some imported mozilla tests. Are there more mozilla tests, or > will we ever re-import those? These were "imported" a long time ago old style; manually and piecemeal. If we ever import any other tests they'll go into a fresh imported/* directory. (In reply to comment #10) > And we will need more test expectations for the private tests anyways. > Couldn't those just have a different name in the expectations? It's a more full proof "import" to the private copy when the expectations file can just copy over with no edits. The DB name doesn't add anything, anyways - I see no reason to argue for its preservation.
Ok, sounds good
Created attachment 269186 [details] Patch for EWS then landing
Comment on attachment 269186 [details] Patch for EWS then landing Clearing flags on attachment: 269186 Committed r195181: <http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/195181>