Now that the jetpack tree tests are run using the fx-team binaries, the job name has changed to: jetpack-fx-team-ubuntu32_vm-opt (etc) This means they no longer match the regexp at: https://hg.mozilla.org/webtools/tbpl/file/a450877aae00/js/Data.js#l588 ...and so are displaying as "JP", not "m-c". However, this regexp was only really useful in the "jetpack wasn't in the tree and the jetpack-specific tree ran against m-c/aurora/..." days. We now only run against fx-team, so tbh we should just get rid of this special-casing and display them as "JP" (as they are accidentally at the moment). Wes, can you confirm how the tests running on the jetpack tree differ (if at all) fro the "JP" suite that runs on all other trees? (Since if they do significantly different things, might still be worth keeping the symbols different).

My understanding is that the Jetpack tree's testsuite grabs the most recently finished build of Firefox from the specified tree (fx-team now, used to be m-c, used to also do m-a m-b and m-r), then grabs the current tip of the hg mirror of the github master branch of the addon-sdk repository, then runs all of the tests, overriding the Firefox-bundled version of the SDK. So this essentially tests the tip of Jetpack against the tip of fx-team. On the actual Firefox trees, I believe it takes the finished Firefox build from that push, and runs the tests against the bundled version of the SDK. This tests the most-recently-uplifted version of the SDK against that specific version of Firefox. Dave might be able to confirm my understanding of how this works. I personally don't see any reason the Jetpack tree's test should be named anything other than "JP" at this point. It was really only useful when we were testing against multiple Firefox branches. Don't really care what it's called these days, to be perfectly honest.

Stops us special-casing the jetpack tree's own jobs; they are already being picked up by the main jetpack job regexp.

Comment on attachment 796087 [details] [diff] [review] Patch v1 Review of attachment 796087 [details] [diff] [review]: ----------------------------------------------------------------- Looks good to me.

Ty :-) https://hg.mozilla.org/webtools/tbpl/rev/d0afc56636f6

I'm confident with Wes' explanation in comment 1, so cancelling the needinfo :-)

In production :-)