1017254 - Add TBPL support for webapprt-chrome tests

Status: RESOLVED FIXED

(Tree Management Graveyard :: TBPL, defect)

Description

[Jonathan Griffin (:jgriffin)]

We'll likely eventually have webapprt-content tests as well.  Sheriffs, any preferences for TBPL letters?

Also, do we need to separately file a bug to add Treeherder support?

Comment 1

[Ryan VanderMeulen [:RyanVM]]

These are mochitests?

Comment 2

[Jonathan Griffin (:jgriffin)]

They're basically a flavor of mochitests, yes.

Comment 3

[Jonathan Griffin (:jgriffin)]

(In reply to Ryan VanderMeulen [:RyanVM UTC-4] from comment #1)
> These are mochitests?

Given that, how about Mw (webapprt-content) and Mwc (webapprt-chrome)?  These would get grouped with the existing mochitest sets:  M(1 2 3 4 5 oth wc) for example.

Comment 4

[Jonathan Griffin (:jgriffin)]

Attachment: Add webapprt support to TBPL,

Here's something to we can start iterating on.

Comment 5

[Ryan VanderMeulen [:RyanVM]]

Comment on attachment 8435050 [details] [diff] [review]
Add webapprt support to TBPL,

Review of attachment 8435050 [details] [diff] [review]:
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Please list these after robocop. Also, should we call these "Mochitest Webapprt..." ?

Comment 6

[Jonathan Griffin (:jgriffin)]

Myk, should these be "Webapprt [Content|Chrome]" or "Mochitest Webapprt [Content|Chrome]" in TBPL?

Comment 7

[Myk Melez [:myk] [@mykmelez]]

(In reply to Jonathan Griffin (:jgriffin) from comment #6)
> Myk, should these be "Webapprt [Content|Chrome]" or "Mochitest Webapprt
> [Content|Chrome]" in TBPL?

They should be simply "Webapprt [Content|Chrome]"!  As we don't have plans to introduce other runtime-related test harnesses.  And we can always rename them later if we end up doing so.

Comment 8

[Jonathan Griffin (:jgriffin)]

Moved tests to after robocop; left test names as-is per Myk.

https://hg.mozilla.org/webtools/tbpl/rev/9d03594d7ceb

Comment 9

[Jonathan Griffin (:jgriffin)]

Will let this ride the next TBPL push to production, whenever that happens.

Comment 10

[Ryan VanderMeulen [:RyanVM]]

We usually hold off on resolving until then :)

Comment 11

[Ed Morley [:emorley]]

This was in production on 2014-06-12, forgot to update the bug then.