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

Editorial: cleanup some area opener/noopener tests #17025

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
May 27, 2019
Merged

Conversation

annevk
Copy link
Member

@annevk annevk commented May 27, 2019

As pointed out in #15188 (comment) it was a bit confusing (and wrong).

As pointed out in #15188 (comment) it was a bit confusing (and wrong).
@annevk annevk requested a review from zcorpan May 27, 2019 09:13
@annevk
Copy link
Member Author

annevk commented May 27, 2019

cc @ericlaw1979

@annevk
Copy link
Member Author

annevk commented May 27, 2019

@foolip #15188 (comment) onward still applies, so if this looks okay this can be landed. (The stability issue in Chrome remains if I comment out all area tests, so that isn't it.)

@foolip
Copy link
Member

foolip commented May 27, 2019

@annevk seems like preexisting flakiness not caused by your changes, right? I'll review and admin merge.

@KyleJu @lukebjerring can you use this as an example of flakiness to annotate in the ongoing metadata project? It's a good one because there's a mix of failures and passes in the same test.

@foolip foolip merged commit 36f2a92 into master May 27, 2019
@foolip foolip deleted the annevk/area-opener branch May 27, 2019 13:58
@annevk
Copy link
Member Author

annevk commented May 27, 2019

Yeah, the tests were already flaky in Chrome, this only serves to remove some confusing aspects of the tests that were not relevant. Thanks for merging!

marcoscaceres pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jul 23, 2019
As pointed out in #15188 (comment) it was a bit confusing (and wrong).
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants