Closed
Bug 1018854
Opened 10 years ago
Closed 10 years ago
Start the migration after upgrading
Categories
(Firefox OS Graveyard :: Gaia::Homescreen, defect)
Tracking
(feature-b2g:2.0, b2g-v2.0 verified, b2g-v2.1 fixed)
People
(Reporter: crdlc, Assigned: macajc)
References
Details
(Keywords: verifyme, Whiteboard: [systemsfe])
Attachments
(1 file)
46 bytes,
text/x-github-pull-request
|
fcampo
:
review+
bajaj
:
approval-gaia-v2.0+
|
Details | Review |
No description provided.
Updated•10 years ago
|
Whiteboard: [systemsfe]
Comment 1•10 years ago
|
||
What will happen here? Is this just data migration, or does this include the changes necessary to message the user?
Reporter | ||
Comment 2•10 years ago
|
||
It is just to land data migration behind scene
Reporter | ||
Comment 3•10 years ago
|
||
Basically to start the process implemented in bug 1018852.
Reporter | ||
Updated•10 years ago
|
Assignee: nobody → crdlc
Status: NEW → ASSIGNED
Updated•10 years ago
|
Target Milestone: --- → 2.0 S3 (6june)
Reporter | ||
Comment 4•10 years ago
|
||
Hi mates, I am wondering how do it because I am bit lost :)... I have already implemented the mechanism to propagate collections and bookmarks to datastores in bug 1018852. The idea is to send a message to old homescreen to start the migration via IAC. My questions are: From where can I send this message to old homescreen? How can I know what we are upgrading from 1.x to 2.0? Thanks guys
Flags: needinfo?(sfoster)
Flags: needinfo?(kyle)
Flags: needinfo?(kgrandon)
Comment 5•10 years ago
|
||
Hi Cristian, You can see the work-in-progress on the upgrade/FTU stuff here: https://github.com/sfoster/gaia/tree/bug-939174-upgrade-tutorial (on bug 939174). Basically, the FTU launcher will launch it if it sees that the device.previous_os and device.os are different (and a tutorial config exists). You can look through that branch to see what's going on, but I'm not sure if that really answers your question? You could make the same checks in an 'ftudone' event handler maybe?
Flags: needinfo?(sfoster)
Comment 6•10 years ago
|
||
Sounds like this depends on bug 939174 landing, or taking a small piece of it. I think we should use the same solution if possible. Thanks for the info in Sam.
Flags: needinfo?(kgrandon)
Reporter | ||
Comment 7•10 years ago
|
||
I think that I could wait for that bug IMHO
Comment 8•10 years ago
|
||
oh, sec that wont work currently, as FtuLauncher clears the device.previous_os before firing ftudone. We could clear that setting later maybe - it just needs to be wiped before the FTU next runs. I'm open to suggestions
Reporter | ||
Comment 9•10 years ago
|
||
It makes sense although I don't have all the context (to be honest nothing) because I have never touched anything piece of code in the FTU. Basically we want to send a message via IAC to old homescreen from FTU app to migrate data after upgrading from 1.x to 2.0. Maybe it could be implemented by someone with more knowledge thought or perhaps after landing that bug I can see how do it
Comment 10•10 years ago
|
||
Could you could check the version of the IDB in the old homescreen app, to see if it correlates to a version in the 1.x series?
Flags: needinfo?(kyle)
Reporter | ||
Comment 11•10 years ago
|
||
Yes, I can get the revisionId for bookmarks datastore for instance in a private IDB in old homescreen. If it does not exists we have to migrate, otherwise, we can receive the IAC message called 'migrate' and nothing to do if the old homescreen has a revisionId. This is like to have a flag to say, we have migrated or not. But it is useful only when we don't know from the FTU if we are upgrading or not. So we could send the message always that the FTU is started without exception and the old homescreen will do migrate or not depending on the previous explained. Did you mean this Kyle?
Updated•10 years ago
|
QA Whiteboard: [VH-FL-blocking+]
Updated•10 years ago
|
QA Whiteboard: [VH-FL-blocking+] → [VH-FL-blocking-]
Updated•10 years ago
|
Target Milestone: 2.0 S3 (6june) → 2.0 S4 (20june)
Updated•10 years ago
|
feature-b2g: --- → 2.0
Updated•10 years ago
|
QA Whiteboard: [VH-FL-blocking-] → [VH-FL-blocking-][VH-FC-blocking+]
Assignee | ||
Comment 13•10 years ago
|
||
Attachment #8438721 -
Flags: review?(crdlc)
Updated•10 years ago
|
QA Whiteboard: [VH-FL-blocking-][VH-FC-blocking+] → [VH-FL-blocking+][VH-FC-blocking+]
Reporter | ||
Comment 14•10 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 8438721 [details] [review] Proposed patch v1 R+ from home side, please ask to somebody related to FTU, Fernando, could you review or address it properly? Thanks a lot
Attachment #8438721 -
Flags: review?(crdlc) → review+
Flags: needinfo?(fernando.campo)
Reporter | ||
Comment 15•10 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 8438721 [details] [review] Proposed patch v1 Hi Fernando, do you have any chance to take a look to this today? We will appreciate it a lot mate
Attachment #8438721 -
Flags: review?(fernando.campo)
Reporter | ||
Updated•10 years ago
|
Flags: needinfo?(fernando.campo)
Comment 16•10 years ago
|
||
Hi, just one comment about the use of IAC in the FTU. Not saying that is not the solution here, but we should be careful with the use of this tecnique. Right now we are launching as well a IAC for notifying contacts of the FB token, could this to call clash? Also, the homescreen should be already launched, but what's the impact of the new process, in the case of contacts is 6.9 MB, just for handing a value that will be stored on indexeddb. Could you use firewatch [1] to measure the impact of this? Take into account that tarako could get 2.0 update and too many IAC calls together could end up in a mess if OOMKiller joins the party. Again, not saying that is not the solution, but want a good meassure of the impact. Thanks. [1] https://www.npmjs.org/package/firewatch
Comment 17•10 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 8438721 [details] [review] Proposed patch v1 Codewise, looks good. Only concern to address in github comment, and please check what Francisco said before about memory and possible clashes. Maybe we can post here the firewatch results to check that doesn't clash?
Comment 18•10 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 8438721 [details] [review] Proposed patch v1 ooops, just realized that no unit tests. really needed before merging, sorry.
Attachment #8438721 -
Flags: review?(fernando.campo)
Assignee | ||
Comment 19•10 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 8438721 [details] [review] Proposed patch v1 added unit test
Attachment #8438721 -
Flags: review+ → review?(fernando.campo)
Comment 20•10 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 8438721 [details] [review] Proposed patch v1 Looks good now, thanks for the unit test. Cristian already r+ed before for the homescreen part, so good to merge when travis green.
Attachment #8438721 -
Flags: review?(fernando.campo) → review+
Reporter | ||
Comment 21•10 years ago
|
||
Merged in master: https://github.com/mcjimenez/gaia/commit/0d3291fa28ddd8be8e43762f93bed7f27c233aeb
Status: ASSIGNED → RESOLVED
Closed: 10 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Assignee | ||
Comment 22•10 years ago
|
||
Requesting blocking 2.0 because migrating previously user collections is essential to avoid users' data loss
blocking-b2g: --- → 2.0?
Assignee | ||
Comment 23•10 years ago
|
||
Sorry for the mistake, this should be approval only, not blocking
blocking-b2g: 2.0? → ---
Assignee | ||
Comment 24•10 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 8438721 [details] [review] Proposed patch v1 NOTE: Please see https://wiki.mozilla.org/Release_Management/B2G_Landing to better understand the B2G approval process and landings. [Approval Request Comment] [Bug caused by] (feature/regressing bug #): Vertical homescreen [User impact] if declined: If a user is updating from 1.3/1.4 to 2.0, he will lose any collection he might have defined, since they won't be migrated to the new homescreen [Testing completed]: On the device. The patch includes unit tests also. [Risk to taking this patch] (and alternatives if risky): Low [String changes made]: None NOTE: Please see https://wiki.mozilla.org/Release_Management/B2G_Landing to better understand the B2G approval process and landings.
Attachment #8438721 -
Flags: approval-gaia-v2.0?
Updated•10 years ago
|
status-b2g-v2.0:
--- → affected
status-b2g-v2.1:
--- → fixed
Flags: needinfo?(jlorenzo)
Keywords: verifyme
Comment 25•10 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 8438721 [details] [review] Proposed patch v1 Johan can you please help verify this on 2.0 once it lands.
Attachment #8438721 -
Flags: approval-gaia-v2.0? → approval-gaia-v2.0+
Comment 26•10 years ago
|
||
v2.0: https://github.com/mozilla-b2g/gaia/commit/8a6791411fdca9407fb600b6292e109d8f3286d9
Comment 27•10 years ago
|
||
Verified as per comment https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1017069#c20
Status: RESOLVED → VERIFIED
Flags: needinfo?(jlorenzo)
Updated•10 years ago
|
Flags: in-moztrap-
Comment 29•9 years ago
|
||
Per Comment 25 & Comment 27,if someone feels convenient,please verify on v2.1.
Keywords: verifyme
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•