On 09/04/2019 20:44, Andrew Halberstadt wrote:
Yeah, I did consider "non-e10s" for awhile and maybe it is the better
choice. But here are my counter arguments:
1) One of the goals of this change is to de-clutter the treeherder UI.
Using an 8 character symbol suffix runs counter to that goal (even if it is
still less cluttered overall).
2) People who use "e10s" in their |mach try fuzzy| queries out of muscle
memory (or in saved presets) will accidentally select the exact opposite of
what they want.
3) For new contributors "e10s" is a code word anyway. It's just now they
need to learn "fc" instead of "e10s".
None of those are terribly compelling, but it's still enough to make me
prefer "-fc".
I think (1) and (2) here are good points; I'm less convinced by (3).
Yes, e10s is a code word, but it's one that is pretty long-established
and pervasive in the project and surrounding documentation (it even
shows up in the names of about:config settings). It appeared in
treeherder UI *because* it was a well-established term within the project.
The proposed -fc suffix, on the other hand, seems gratuitously cryptic.
If it had suddenly appeared in treeherder, I'd have been totally
clueless as to its meaning; and even after seeing the announcement here,
it feels like an artificial label that's trying a bit too hard to come
up with a "clever" code where none is needed. It's not like we're
starting with a standard multi-process configuration, and launching a
grand "Fuel Cell" project that aims to merge the processes together.
How about suffixing these jobs with -sp for "Single Process"? That would
be a lot more transparent, IMO.
JK
_______________________________________________
dev-platform mailing list
dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
