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

Create an RFC for what material is and is not allowed in WPT #30

Closed
boazsender opened this issue Sep 17, 2019 · 5 comments
Closed

Create an RFC for what material is and is not allowed in WPT #30

boazsender opened this issue Sep 17, 2019 · 5 comments
Assignees

Comments

@boazsender
Copy link

@boazsender boazsender commented Sep 17, 2019

We lack a clear policy of when to accept/reject material.

Some further action is needed after the discussion at TPAC regarding "tests that depend on test-only APIs implemented using Mojo for Chromium, e.g. WebXR, WebUSB".

It seems like there was latent consensus that tests which can only be run in one browser engine and will never be able to run in multiple engines, should not be included in WPT. There was even linting recently written to address a case of this: web-platform-tests/wpt#18509.

@Hexcles
Copy link
Member

@Hexcles Hexcles commented Sep 17, 2019

Tangentially, we also discussed the possibility of "tentative" directories and correspondingly a guidance like e.g. "a directory for a new API with only an explainer without a draft spec should be marked as tentative". I'm not sure if we should have a different RFC for "tentative" directories though cc @jgraham .

@foolip
Copy link
Member

@foolip foolip commented Sep 17, 2019

@boazsender can I assign this to you? I don't think @web-platform-tests/wpt-core-team feel we are on the hook to resolve issues in this repo, just PRs.

@Hexcles
Copy link
Member

@Hexcles Hexcles commented Sep 17, 2019

Also in regards to the specifics of MojoJS: web-platform-tests/wpt#16455 (comment)

@boazsender
Copy link
Author

@boazsender boazsender commented Sep 17, 2019

@foolip: sure thing!

@foolip
Copy link
Member

@foolip foolip commented May 4, 2021

@boazsender I'm going to go ahead and close this issue now, but if you do still want to send an RFC for it, certainly that would be welcome!

@foolip foolip closed this May 4, 2021
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Linked pull requests

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

None yet
3 participants