Add unique_name test attr, fix UI active test selection, clean up test_list.

Add unique_name test attr, fix UI active test selection, clean up test_list.

Change-Id: I945157c8c51454ad0abc5d56c7aa6feab01893d8

[Hung-Te, 2010-08-24 08:18:23]

http://codereview.chromium.org/3151032/diff/1/2
File client/bin/factory.py (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/3151032/diff/1/2#newcode64
client/bin/factory.py:64: kbd_shortcut=None, subtest_list=[]):
So Automated Sequence won't have unique names. (Will we need that?)

http://codereview.chromium.org/3151032/diff/3001/4003
File client/site_tests/suite_Factory/test_list (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/3151032/diff/3001/4003#newcode164
client/site_tests/suite_Factory/test_list:164: # OperatorTest(
what about adding a parameter like "bypass=True" or "dummy=True"?

[Tammo Spalink, 2010-08-24 09:16:43]

http://codereview.chromium.org/3151032/diff/1/2
File client/bin/factory.py (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/3151032/diff/1/2#newcode64
client/bin/factory.py:64: kbd_shortcut=None, subtest_list=[]):
we don't yet, but sure if you want them :-) 

On 2010/08/24 08:18:23, Hung-Te wrote:
> So Automated Sequence won't have unique names. (Will we need that?)

http://codereview.chromium.org/3151032/diff/3001/4003
File client/site_tests/suite_Factory/test_list (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/3151032/diff/3001/4003#newcode164
client/site_tests/suite_Factory/test_list:164: # OperatorTest(
you mean, instead of the comments?  my thinking was that going through these was
probably annoying for our testing team, and that we would uncomment once there
is a real test.

On 2010/08/24 08:18:23, Hung-Te wrote:
> what about adding a parameter like "bypass=True" or "dummy=True"?

[Hung-Te, 2010-08-24 10:34:20]

LGTM

On 2010/08/24 09:16:43, Tammo Spalink wrote:
> we don't yet, but sure if you want them :-) 
  Well, I don't need it now, so it's OK.

> you mean, instead of the comments?  my thinking was that going through these
was
> probably annoying for our testing team, and that we would uncomment once there
> is a real test.
   sounds ok.
> 
> On 2010/08/24 08:18:23, Hung-Te wrote:
> > what about adding a parameter like "bypass=True" or "dummy=True"?