Philip Jägenstedt

If someone would like to take over this RFC and drive it to completion, I would be very happy. It's a lot of work to ensure this change won't break...

The second riskiest I think might be wpt-metadata, since there are multiple pieces of code creating automated pull requests. Creating a pull request requires a target branch, so that'll need...

For anyone coming across this, I do not plan to work on this. Feel free to take it over as a new RFC and I will close this one.

@annevk I think you've asked about this as well, do you remember where the previous discussion happened?

> If the distinction could be made, I'd be interested in seeing changes to existing tests, but not so much in the addition of new tests or tentative tests. This...

I think we should remove the graph from the top of /results, but I don't think we should *just* remove it. We have triaged Chrome-only failures to keep our BSF...

Maybe a view like this would be the most friendly: https://wpt.fyi/results/?label=master&label=experimental&product=chrome&product=firefox&product=safari&view=subtest&q=%28chrome%3A%21pass%26chrome%3A%21missing%29%20firefox%3Apass%20safari%3Apass

@gsnedders thanks, that clearly demonstrates the outsized impact of test suites with lots of individual tests. For comparison/posterity, here's the current BSF graph on wpt.fyi: A few options for improving...

@karlcow I've also toyed with the idea of allowing filtering by spec status or implementation status, and I think that would be valuable. I think at least the following filters...

@jgraham how do you see this RFC interacting with https://github.com/web-platform-tests/rfcs/pull/120? Per that RFC the interop team will take ownership of this. And I now see that RFC should be considered...