Create new tinderbox tree for automated tests - Cybertron

RESOLVED WONTFIX

Status

Release Engineering
General
RESOLVED WONTFIX
11 years ago
5 years ago

People

(Reporter: rc, Assigned: rhelmer)

Tracking

Firefox Tracking Flags

(Not tracked)

Details

(Reporter)

Description

11 years ago
Need a new tinderbox tree to receive results from automated test buildbots. Currently three buildbots will be reporting with more to come online as made ready.

Suggesting name "Cybertron".

Comment 1

11 years ago
don't we want these reporting to the main Firefox tree?
Group: mozillaorgconfidential
(Reporter)

Comment 2

11 years ago
yes, but there were some concerns that this would make the main tree too wide. This suggestion was proposed by rhelmer and would put the tree in an iframe on the main page.

Updated

11 years ago
Group: mozillaorgconfidential
(Assignee)

Comment 3

11 years ago
Can someone propose a more meaningful name than Cybertron? Or else I'll do it! :)
(Reporter)

Comment 4

11 years ago
Do you have something against The Transformers? :)
(Assignee)

Updated

11 years ago
Assignee: build → rhelmer
I'm not sure putting them in an iframe is a great idea.  We already have a bunch of iframes there, which are summarily ignored by pretty much everybody for two reasons:

1) They're usually red or orange (which largely happens because everyone
   ignores them).
2) They're hard to get to.  For example, I have to scroll down to see the top
   of the topmost iframe because of the big gray bar above them.  With the
   increasing numbers of laptop widescreen monitors, this issue is getting
   worse.

I feel very strongly that we do NOT want these tests falling into that situation.  If the stuff to the left of the tinderbox tree were not there, we _could_ fit two more builds without it being too wide over here, so three doesn't feel like a huge stretch.

Have we considered asking someone who has UI design experience to see what they can do with tinderbox?  For example, simple changes like not reporting Tp2 to a (useless) seven significant figures, renaming Tdhtml to something shorter, and renaming fxdbug-linux-tbox to something shorter (or breaking on the dashes) would easily create enough space for another tinderbox, as far as I can tell.

Comment 6

11 years ago
I want them on the main Firefox tree, like I said this morning. :-)
(Assignee)

Comment 7

11 years ago
(In reply to comment #5)
> I'm not sure putting them in an iframe is a great idea.  We already have a
> bunch of iframes there, which are summarily ignored by pretty much everybody
> for two reasons:
> 
> 1) They're usually red or orange (which largely happens because everyone
>    ignores them).
> 2) They're hard to get to.  For example, I have to scroll down to see the top
>    of the topmost iframe because of the big gray bar above them.  With the
>    increasing numbers of laptop widescreen monitors, this issue is getting
>    worse.
> 
> I feel very strongly that we do NOT want these tests falling into that
> situation.  If the stuff to the left of the tinderbox tree were not there, we
> _could_ fit two more builds without it being too wide over here, so three
> doesn't feel like a huge stretch.
> 
> Have we considered asking someone who has UI design experience to see what they
> can do with tinderbox?  For example, simple changes like not reporting Tp2 to a
> (useless) seven significant figures, renaming Tdhtml to something shorter, and
> renaming fxdbug-linux-tbox to something shorter (or breaking on the dashes)
> would easily create enough space for another tinderbox, as far as I can tell.


I totally agree with this issue fwiw; Tinderbox does not present information in a very usable way. There has been some work in bug 366784 to make the front page more usable (w/ offline input from dolske and beltzner) but it doesn't address the actual tree pages. It's trying to optimize for developers who want to know if they can check in or not.

So, I am totally fine with robcee publishing this straight to the Firefox page, but renaming servers and tests is a separate issue. Should that issue block robcee from publishing? I don't think it should.
I don't think it should either.  I think we should put these builds on the front page, then see what it looks like.  And file followup bugs on ui improvements.
(Assignee)

Comment 9

11 years ago
Sounds good to me! No Cybertron for you, publish to Firefox tree.
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Last Resolved: 11 years ago
Resolution: --- → WONTFIX
QA Contact: mozpreed → build
Product: mozilla.org → Release Engineering
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.