641615 - unify JS test logic and async tests

Status: RESOLVED WONTFIX

(Testing Graveyard :: Mozmill, defect)

Description

[Jeff Hammel]

The JS side of Mozmill has test running and loading logic scattered
all over the place:  see

https://github.com/mozautomation/mozmill/blob/master/mozmill/mozmill/extension/resource/modules/controller.js

- a prototype "class" for MozMillAsyncTest is listed here.  The
  presents two disparate control flows: normal tests and async tests.
  This should be unified to a single "class" so that we only have one
  control flow to manage.  It probably shouldn't live in controller or
  other existing file either

https://github.com/mozautomation/mozmill/blob/master/mozmill/mozmill/extension/resource/modules/frame.js

- loadFile and Collector.prototype.initTestModule both are responsible
  for loading the test and populating various pieces of the test
  module.  These should really live in e.g. the constructor for test
  class

- the complicated running logic which (again) has two different code
  paths, one for normal test one for the async test.  Instead of
  having the test be responsible for what it does, the runner tries to
  introspect too much.  The runner instead should be deprecated,
  probably, and its functionality delegated to the new test class

Comment 1

[Jeff Hammel]

As per IRC conversation and comments on bug 638989 we're taking out setupTest and teardownTest as part of this bug too. Of course, appropriately subclassing can reproduce this effect if desired

Comment 2

[Jeff Hammel]

so, it looks like MozMillAsyncTest is not used in comm-central or, abict, in the wild at all.  We can take this bug for 2.0, or we can punt, cleanup, and revisit later.  Any thoughts?

As a rough estimate:
- eliminating references to mozmill-async: maybe 1 hour
- making everything into a class: i dunno, between 8-16 hours if nothing bad happens?

Comment 3

[cmtalbert]

We're going to hold this one in the queue, it doesn't seem like this refactoring is really warranted right now, so we can make the decision later if this is something we want for 2.0 or 2.1.

Comment 4

[cmtalbert]

Code was removed from mozmill, marking WFM