After random order switch, convert all RandomOrder FYI bots to be NaturalOrder bots |
|||||||
Issue descriptionSo that we still have coverage of tests left in RandomOrderExpectations
,
Dec 12 2016
Pinging qyearsley & tansell - need your input on this.
,
Dec 13 2016
How much effort are options (1) or (2) ? IIUC, there are about 160 tests which are still in RandomOrderExpectations. In the medium term we do need to either fix or delete these tests, since there's no way we're going to be able to enforce they keep passing if it's not part of the real CQ. mcgreevy, do you have thoughts?
,
Dec 14 2016
I don't think they'd be too much effort, we just need to request the builders and create an infra CL. Since we don't have a ton of time I'd advocate for #2 so we can switch the current builders over to being DefaultOrder now.
,
Dec 14 2016
Update from our discussion: tl;dr we're going with #2. I'm going to go ahead and create a CL to transition all RandomOrder builders to be DefaultOrder. At the same time I'm going to request VMs for swarming bots. I'm going to try to get the Linux swarming bot up first since that should be able to be provisioned the fastest, and the Mac and Win builders up as they're ready.
,
Dec 15 2016
,
Dec 15 2016
,
Dec 15 2016
Just a note, this will probably entail 2 CLs: one for Linux & Mac and a later one for Windows.
,
Dec 15 2016
I just realized that the name 'DefaultOrder' isn't appropriate because random will be the new default. I think NaturalOrder makes more sense since that's the flag value (--order=natural). Additionally, the NaturalOrder bots won't need to run the full layout test suite. They only need to run the small subset tests that have been skipped because of random order flakiness. I'll create a separate bug for that.
,
Dec 15 2016
,
Dec 15 2016
Update: we're not going to providing NaturalOrder bots. The Linux & Mac RandomOrder bots are ready to use as swarming testing grounds.
,
Dec 16 2016
OK, cool. Is the reason for not providing NaturalOrder bots discussed elsewhere?
,
Dec 16 2016
See dpranke's 2nd comment in this thread: https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/#/c/420850/ |
|||||||
►
Sign in to add a comment |
|||||||
Comment 1 by jeffcarp@chromium.org
, Dec 6 2016