-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 29.8k
Switching to Gold Status Check #51968
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
Conversation
|
Gold has detected one or more untriaged digests on patchset 1. |
|
Golden image changes have been found for this pull request. Click here to view and triage (e.g. because this is an intentional change). Check Handling Breaking Changes. While there are exceptions to this rule, if this patch modifies an existing golden file, it is probably not an exception. Only new golden files are not considered breaking changes. Writing a golden file test for Reviewers: Read the Tree Hygiene page and make sure this patch meets those guidelines before LGTMing. Changes reported for pull request 51968 at sha 0075363 |
|
Gold has detected one or more untriaged digests on patchset 2. |
|
Golden image changes have been found for this pull request. Click here to view and triage (e.g. because this is an intentional change). Check Handling Breaking Changes. While there are exceptions to this rule, if this patch modifies an existing golden file, it is probably not an exception. Only new golden files are not considered breaking changes. Writing a golden file test for Reviewers: Read the Tree Hygiene page and make sure this patch meets those guidelines before LGTMing. Changes reported for pull request 51968 at sha a9fa8dd |
|
I am going to close this for now, will return. |
|
Golden file changes have been found for this pull request. Click here to view and triage (e.g. because this is an intentional change). Changes to golden files are considered breaking changes, so consult Handling Breaking Changes to proceed. While there are exceptions to this rule, if this patch modifies an existing golden file, it is probably not an exception. Only new golden file tests, or downstream changes like those from skia updates are considered non-breaking. For more guidance, visit Writing a golden file test for Reviewers: Read the Tree Hygiene page and make sure this patch meets those guidelines before LGTMing. |
|
Gold has detected one or more untriaged digests on patchset 3. |
|
Golden file changes remain available for triage from new commit, Click here to view. |
|
Gold has detected one or more untriaged digests on patchset 4. |
|
Golden file changes remain available for triage from new commit, Click here to view. |
|
Triaged at 1:49 pm pt, |
|
Going to push a commit now that alters an existing golden file, validating a previous green state for |
|
Gold has detected one or more untriaged digests on patchset 6. |
|
Golden file changes remain available for triage from new commit, Click here to view. |
|
Now I will revert the unintended change and make sure it can go green again. |
| }); | ||
| }); | ||
| testWidgets('Inconsequential golden test', (WidgetTester tester) async { | ||
| // This test does not matter, it can be approved at any time if rendering |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I was confused by "this test does not matter" - if it does not matter we should just delete it :)
Maybe rephrase to something like: The test validates foobar. Any changes to the golden file can be approved at any time.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Done!
| } | ||
|
|
||
| return result.exitCode == 0; | ||
| return true; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Why does this method have a return value if it is always true? Should we change it to return Future<void>.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Fixed!
| return skiaClient.tryjobAdd(golden.path, goldenFile); | ||
| await skiaClient.tryjobAdd(golden.path, goldenFile); | ||
|
|
||
| return true; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This probably deserves a comment. Why does the comparison always succeed?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Done!
goderbauer
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM
|
This thread has been automatically locked since there has not been any recent activity after it was closed. If you are still experiencing a similar issue, please open a new bug, including the output of |
Description
This PR will change framework tests to rely on the Gold status check introduced in
flutter/cocoon#651
This also adds an "inconsequential golden test" to more easily validate changes to Gold integration and detect if the dashboard is not working properly.
Related Issues
Fixes #48744
Tests
Inconsequential golden file test.
Checklist
Before you create this PR confirm that it meets all requirements listed below by checking the relevant checkboxes (
[x]). This will ensure a smooth and quick review process.///).flutter analyze --flutter-repo) does not report any problems on my PR.Breaking Change
Did any tests fail when you ran them? Please read Handling breaking changes.