Rename a few variables and greatly reduce the amount of data sent for steps* events

Rename a few variables and greatly reduce the amount of data sent for steps* events

Committed: http://src.chromium.org/viewvc/chrome?view=rev&revision=41213

[M-A Ruel, 2010-03-10 02:50:49]

wdyt?

I'll send a review for aebuild tomorrow.

[chase, 2010-03-10 03:26:59]

lgtm

[chris.atlee, 2010-03-10 17:22:58]

On 2010/03/10 03:26:59, chase wrote:
> lgtm

looks fine to me as well.

[M-A Ruel, 2010-03-10 20:36:06]

http://codereview.chromium.org/809001/diff/6001/3002
File pylibs/buildbot/status/builder.py (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/809001/diff/6001/3002#newcode1121
pylibs/buildbot/status/builder.py:1121: result['isStarted'] = self.isStarted()
I realize that member variables aren't consistently that style after all so I'm
probably better to revert that part, wdyt?

[chris.atlee, 2010-03-10 20:41:35]

On 2010/03/10 20:36:06, Marc-Antoine Ruel wrote:
> http://codereview.chromium.org/809001/diff/6001/3002
> File pylibs/buildbot/status/builder.py (right):
> 
> http://codereview.chromium.org/809001/diff/6001/3002#newcode1121
> pylibs/buildbot/status/builder.py:1121: result['isStarted'] = self.isStarted()
> I realize that member variables aren't consistently that style after all so
I'm
> probably better to revert that part, wdyt?

I think it's better to have the keys in the status dictionaries all follow the
same convention, regardless of how the member variables are named.  It makes
more sense for consumers of the data.

[M-A Ruel, 2010-03-10 21:53:00]

On 2010/03/10 20:41:35, chris.atlee wrote:
> I think it's better to have the keys in the status dictionaries all follow the
> same convention, regardless of how the member variables are named.  It makes
> more sense for consumers of the data.

Yes but it's still varying. Anyways.

Chase, are you fine with the properties management and the new unit test fix? I
guess so I just want to confirm.

[chase, 2010-03-10 22:02:16]

On 2010/03/10 21:53:00, Marc-Antoine Ruel wrote:
> Chase, are you fine with the properties management and the new unit test fix?
I
> guess so I just want to confirm.

y, lgtm