Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Cross-browser test results of tests in a PR are not very discoverable #1307

Open
zcorpan opened this issue May 13, 2019 · 4 comments
Open

Cross-browser test results of tests in a PR are not very discoverable #1307

zcorpan opened this issue May 13, 2019 · 4 comments
Labels
enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@zcorpan
Copy link
Member

zcorpan commented May 13, 2019

So I wanted to find out what the test results were for web-platform-tests/wpt#14824 and clicked around in the links from the PR's status checks.

https://github.com/web-platform-tests/wpt/pull/14824/checks?check_run_id=50686531

The last link there ("Latest results for c70defa") is what I wanted, but I didn't get to that one before I gave up and asked @jugglinmike if he knew if what I was looking for existed. He found it by searching, so maybe I just suck at finding things. But then again, if I can't find this when I know the test results are there, how do we expect other contributors to find it?

Can we make it more discoverable?

cc @Hexcles

@foolip foolip transferred this issue from web-platform-tests/wpt May 15, 2019
@foolip foolip added the enhancement New feature or request label May 15, 2019
@foolip
Copy link
Member

foolip commented May 15, 2019

@lukebjerring this is about the wpt.fyi checks. There may be other open issues about this, but I've experienced the same thing when reviewing IDL update PRs, that it takes quite a bit of time to go through the results and comparing cross-browser results is tricky.

A single check would probably address this, but there might be other ways too.

@lukebjerring
Copy link
Contributor

Can we make it more discoverable?

Do we have any suggestions here?
Maybe a different name for the link? Another, separate, status check, for interoperability?

@zcorpan
Copy link
Member Author

zcorpan commented May 15, 2019

Another, separate, status check, for interoperability?

Yes, and putting it first (or at least early) in the list, I think would make it a lot more discoverable.

@foolip
Copy link
Member

foolip commented May 18, 2019

The order of checks unfortunately I think can't be controlled, but one could try to reduce the total number of checks to make it easier.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants