Policy proposal: don't add tests with names that only include bug numbers and no description

Gregory Szorc gps at mozilla.com
Wed Sep 18 16:51:57 UTC 2013

On 9/18/13 9:23 AM, Gijs Kruitbosch wrote:
> TL;DR: I'd like to propose having a policy to require new tests (or
> updates to existing tests) to have descriptive file names - which means
> more than just a bug number.
> Longer explanation: some of us were talking on IRC about how we have
> lots of tests that have filenames that only have a bug number as useful
> information. For example:
> $ ls -1 browser/base/content/test/ | grep 'browser_bug[0-9]*.js' | wc -l
> 108
> Of course, bug numbers are useful because then we can read descriptions
> on bugzilla. But TBPL, my terminal window, and the MXR directory
> listings are not bugzilla.
> In other word, this makes it harder to know what tests are testing, and
> to split them up into directories that make topical sense. Furthermore,
> if a test breaks, it's not immediately obvious whether the breakage is
> topical to that test, the fault of that test itself or some other test
> that ran earlier, and if it's some other test: which tests are or are
> not likely suspects for having broken assumptions of tests running after
> themselves.
> Gavin suggested we could just have a policy to require test filenames to
> be more than just bug numbers. I concur. How do others feel about this?

I like your thinking! I proposed this almost 2 years ago. The responses 
are likely still relevant.


More information about the firefox-dev mailing list