Assigned to Platform team to review. 

This is an optional builder sharing a bot with another optional builder that still seems to get some use. It won't buy us much to delete the builder definition. Maybe we should delete it when we delete the other 10.10 builder? Assigning back for your thoughts, and happy to still delete it if you want.

The other builder is mac_chromium_variable_10.10, which is used to run    'factory': m_remote_run('findit/chromium/compile'). It's not clear what utility this provides us beyond the utility provided by mac_chromium_variable.

mac_chromium_variable was added at https://codereview.chromium.org/1581783002 with no additional explanation.

mac_chromium_variable_10.10 was added at https://codereview.chromium.org/1828583002 to match chromium.webkit builders. (?)
https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=596614

It's not clear to me why we need a separate set of builders for Findit that lives on 10.10. I'm guessing this is all unused code/builders/vm now.

+lijeffrey [original author]
+stgao [FindIt TL]

I'd like to keep these bots if possible for now.

mac_chromium_variable is meant to run the findit compile recipe to pinpoint a CL that introduces a compile failure happening on chromium.mac and gets used quite a bit.

mac_chromium_variable_layout and mac_chromium_variable_10.10_layout are to cover identifying the CL that introduce test failures happening on chromium.webkit mac10.9 webkit_tests respectively.

IIRC Findit doesn't yet support running try jobs to identify the culprit for webkit_tests but might in the future, but it's been a while since the team's discussed supporting it that may be worth revisiting.

Assigning this to myself for now to look into the possibility of consolidating mac_chromium_variable_10.10_layout into another osx10.10 builder that does get traffic next week. If it can, then we can release this builder.

Why can't we route all findit jobs to mac_chromium_variable?

Marking as assigned since it's being discussed.
As Erik noted, I fail to understand what makes it necessary to have a separate builder definition.

This bug is highly obsolete now, closing.