Perhaps worth uplifting these beta, given that this has zero user-facing impact and reduces the number of intermittent oranges? I'm noticing that the dependent bugs, e.g. bug 1892222 and bug 1812425, are still having a fair amount of intermittent failures on beta and release (to the level where it's resulting in "This failure happened more than 30 times this week! Resolving this bug is a high priority." and "Try to resolve this bug as soon as possible. If unresolved for 2 weeks, the affected test(s) may be disabled" comments from Intermittent Failures Robot).
Bug 1895092 Comment 30 Edit History
Note: The actual edited comment in the bug view page will always show the original commenter’s name and original timestamp.
Perhaps worth uplifting these to beta? [EDIT: hmm, per next comment, maybe there's not something upliftable, yet beta still seems to be showing signs of this issue] I'm noticing that the dependent bugs, e.g. bug 1892222 and bug 1812425, are still having a fair amount of intermittent ~failures~ unexpected-passes on beta and release (to the level where it's resulting in "This failure happened more than 30 times this week! Resolving this bug is a high priority." and "Try to resolve this bug as soon as possible. If unresolved for 2 weeks, the affected test(s) may be disabled" comments from Intermittent Failures Robot).
Perhaps worth uplifting these to beta? [EDIT: hmm, per next comment, maybe there's not something upliftable, yet beta still seems to be showing signs of this issue] I'm noticing that some dependent bugs -- bug 1892222, bug 1894445, and bug 1812425 -- are still having a fair amount of intermittent unexpected-failures/passes on beta and release (to the level where it's resulting in "This failure happened more than 30 times this week! Resolving this bug is a high priority." and "Try to resolve this bug as soon as possible. If unresolved for 2 weeks, the affected test(s) may be disabled" comments from Intermittent Failures Robot).