Build: Add more tested browsers, update existing ones #263
Conversation
Legitimated fail, fixed, do not afraid to check this stuff yourself :-).
Still do, i think we need to support
Multiple times
Not lately :-(, will cc you into this. |
|
Safari 6.1 isn't "current - 1", it's Safari 6.0. 6.1 & 7.0 were released at Michał Gołębiowski |
|
@mzgol yes, that is yours rational, i have mine –
You don't know that, yes, engine numbers are the same, but you shouldn't trust it, ask any car thief.
If they were released at the same, it qualifies them as the same? Opera From http://jquery.com/browser-support/ -
6.1 is less then 7, 6 is preceded by 7, therefore Safari In any case, i don't see the downside of checking I know, you can debate these stuff too, maybe you even have some clever reply for "car thief" remark, but we have been on this road before, so let's not go on the same cycle, you know my arguments, i know yours. More importantly –
|
The "preceded" word is important - 6.1 didn't precede 7.0. The whole idea about testing on "Current - 1" is to test on a version that most people are on before they switch to the new one. If we treated 6.1 as "Current - 1" and supported only "Current" and "Current - 1" it'd mean that the day 6.1 & 7.0 went out, we'd suddenly stop supporting 99% of Safari users. That said, I advocated a while ago that the "Current/Current - 1" rule should be applied only to rolling release browsers; no one protested & I've seen voices of support so I updated http://jquery.com/browser-support/ to explicitly mention all supported Safari versions (the same applies to Android & iOS that are not rolling release). Here I added all the versions back to 4.0 since that's what README says and they're on BrowserStack & they pass tests so why not.
I didn't work on it recently. There were some voices about BrowserStack possibly supporting some of the syntax natively, specificaly "previous" alongside "current"; there has been progress on that; see: Also, see the discussion about that: browserstack/browserstack-runner#28 It'd be nice if some of it could be leveraged in Karma but I haven't investigated yet if integrating it is possible. If not, I'll just go ahead & implement my own parser based on my proposal. Shouldn't be too hard. |
|
cc @gibson042 since I know he had an opinion about what should be tested. Basically, it boils to the fact we can't realistically test Sizzle on all supported browsers as there would be about 100 of them. We need to get a good coverage, though. IMO we should test newest & oldest supported versions and some in between for better coverage. In Fx case I chose ESR versions, in Chrome case the one used in Node. We don't have to test Opera's older than last 2 versions (except Presto once it works) since it's basically covered by Chrome anyway. We might want to add older than 5.1 iOS versions as well but I had some problems with that and didn't want to mix the issues; we can add it later. In this PR I just wanted to make the coverage more reasonable. |
|
Ultimately, we can't claim support for what we can't test, but inferring over ranges is obviously necessary with such wide claims. So I'm fine with bumping Firefox to 3.6 and Chrome to 14, and approve of all @mzgol's special cases (good call on the Node equivalence, btw). As for Safari 6.1, I have no strong feelings. |
I thought about including the version with v8 shared with Node 0.8 but it has v8 only 3 versions older so it wouldn't provide any significant spread in covered versions for us. EDIT: I wrote Node 0.11 instead of 0.8, corrected. |
|
And again –
And again –
|
|
Landed & updated https://github.com/jquery/sizzle/wiki/Sizzle-Documentation |
Firefox: I added 3.6 and last two ESRs. Firefox 3.0 errors with
Some of your tests did a full page reload. Do we want to keep supporting 3.0? We'll need to fix sth if we do; otherwise, Firefox 3.6 is old enough. (EDIT: no longer true: Firefox 29 consistently disconnects, if it starts at all, it stops at 23/35 so I couldn't update the version here. Any ideas? Can it be our bug?)Chrome: 4.0 doesn't even exist in BrowserStack, the oldest available is 14. Is it enough? Would it be OK to bump minimal supported version to it? I added v24 as well since it shares v8 version with Node 0.10.
Safari: Added 4.0, 5.0, 5.1 & 6.0. Removed 6.1 since it shares the same engine version with 7.0 and we're already testing a lot. I know @markelog was opposed to removing in case they start differing but I don't think we should guard ourselves so much about such potential stupidity on WebKit part, especially that we don't test all 26 supported Firefox versions etc. and we already have a lot of browsers. If the rest of you feel similarly to @markelog, I'll bring 6.1 back.
Opera: tried 11.6, 12.0 & 12.6 but it still doesn't connect. @markelog, did you contact BrowserStack about it? Did they reply?
iOS: Added 5.1 to current 6.0 & 7.0.
Android: Added 4.0 & 4.2 to current 2.3 & 4.1.