I'll add one thing to Evan's comments there, which is that it would be useful to be able to create a test before the results are available. That way reviewers can see that such and such tests are still running and their results are pending.

@epriestley, just to double check regarding this point:

Is there any way today to mark a unit test as "Started", or are we limited to "Postponed", "Pass", and "Fail"?

Harbormaster can show that a build is running. If a build is running, arc land will warn you that there's still a running build, too. There's no test-specific mechanism on top of this and we probably won't build one (Harbormaster builds have plenty of other status information, and users who want more granular information about status can click on the build).

I'll add one thing to Evan's comments there, which is that it would be useful to be able to create a test before the results are available. That way reviewers can see that such and such tests are still running and their results are pending.

This isn't documented yet and probably needs some adjustments, but you can now post partial results (e.g., update a build immediately as tests complete). Users can also see that the build is running more clearly now (they could already do that before, but we pull it in more directly now).

Is this sufficient for your use case, or is the ability to create placeholders for individual tests still important?

Is this sufficient for your use case, or is the ability to create placeholders for individual tests still important?

@epriestley - I'll have to defer to others to comment as I am not currently in a position to evaluate Phabricator, having moved on from the team where I was using it.

Ah, thanks! I think we're probably in fairly good shape once everything is properly documented so I'll plan to close this out and we can look at placeholder results in the future if there's a compelling need for it from somewhere else.