[rfc][icedtea-web] known to fail annotation

[Omair Majid]

Hi Jiri,

On 05/14/2012 10:39 AM, Jiri Vanek wrote:
> Hi! This annotation should serve for marking tests which are
> representing the issue and so are constantly failing.

Sorry, but I don't follow. If tests are failing, surely we can see that
in the test reports (make check and friends), right? What advantage does
this annotation give us over that?

> I have dared also to extend it a bit for marking of tests which are not
> failing always, but are failing often by some abstract percentage of how
> often they are failing.

I disagree with the concept of percentage. I don't see the point of
tests that (occasionally) fail. If tests fails all the time, that's
great. If tests don't fail all the time, the test is broken. I don't see
how the percentage helps in either case.

> I believe that this annotation will be very useful, as Reproducers
> representing the issue are strong leverage (for me;) to fix the
> underlying issue.

Okay, but aren't the reproducers failing enough reason (or leverage, if
you will) to fix it?

Cheers,
Omair