If you think a bug might affect users in the 57 release, please set the correct tracking and status flags for Release Management.

Uplift recent PSL changes to aurora and beta

RESOLVED FIXED in Firefox 33, Firefox OS v2.0

Status

()

Firefox
General
RESOLVED FIXED
3 years ago
3 years ago

People

(Reporter: gerv, Assigned: gerv)

Tracking

24 Branch
Firefox 35
Points:
---
Bug Flags:
qe-verify -

Firefox Tracking Flags

(firefox32 wontfix, firefox33 fixed, firefox34 fixed, firefox35 fixed, firefox-esr3133+ fixed, b2g-v1.4 wontfix, b2g-v2.0 fixed, b2g-v2.1 fixed, b2g-v2.2 fixed)

Details

Attachments

(3 attachments, 2 obsolete attachments)

(Assignee)

Description

3 years ago
As in bug 1033340 and bug 1024964, we'd like to uplift recent PSL changes to aurora, beta and ESR 31, to accelerate adoption. 

Gerv
(Assignee)

Comment 1

3 years ago
Created attachment 8487873 [details] [diff] [review]
Patch v.1 for mozilla-aurora

This patch looks large, but it's because the new gTLDs were alphabetized as a side effect of a new, more reliable method of generating the list. (They were previously in order of addition.)

Approval Request Comment
[Feature/regressing bug #]: PSL
[User impact if declined]: Some new gTLDs may have unexpected behaviour.
[Describe test coverage new/current, TBPL]: Baked on trunk.
[Risks and why]: Very low risk; we have made updates like this before.
[String/UUID change made/needed]: None.

Gerv
Attachment #8487873 - Flags: approval-mozilla-aurora?
(Assignee)

Comment 2

3 years ago
Created attachment 8487874 [details] [diff] [review]
Patch v.1 for mozilla-beta

Approval Request Comment - see previous attachment.

Gerv
Attachment #8487874 - Flags: approval-mozilla-beta?
(Assignee)

Comment 3

3 years ago
Created attachment 8487883 [details] [diff] [review]
Patch v.1 for mozilla-esr31

[Approval Request Comment]
If this is not a sec:{high,crit} bug, please state case for ESR consideration:
See above - low-risk update to data file shipped with the product.

Gerv
Attachment #8487883 - Flags: approval-mozilla-esr31?
(Assignee)

Comment 4

3 years ago
lmandel asked for details of which bugs this uplift request relates to. Here's a list, with their m-c checkin dates and details of which branches they need to be applied to. (The last uplift was on 13th June so anything checked in before that is already on all branches.)

Needed on aurora, beta and ESR:

Bug 1061266 - New TLD additions for gTLDs contracted with ICANN from 2014-07-25 to 2014-09-01
m-c: 2014-09-04 

Bug 1061264 - Add service.gov.uk to the PSL
m-c: 2014-09-03

Needed on beta and ESR:

Bug 1051892 - Fix comments in PSL
m-c: 2014-08-13

Bug 1051875 - Update PSL for nom.br
m-c: 2014-08-13

Bug 1041035 - Update subTLDs for .tr
m-c: 2014-08-13

Bug 1040729 - Add yolasite.com to PSL
m-c: 2014-08-13

Bug 1037901 - Add flynnhub.com to PSL
m-c: 2014-08-13

Bug 1028347 - Remove k12.nd.us from PSL
m-c: 2014-08-13

Bug 1024631 - Remove additional line breaks between 4th level .us TLD sections
m-c: 2014-08-13

Bug 1025002 - et domains are now registrable at the 2nd level
m-c: 2014-08-12

Bug 1024740 - Change one instance of "engineering" to "engineer" in the PSL
m-c: 2014-08-12

Bug 1045295 - New TLD additions for TLDs contracted with ICANN from 06/05/2014 - 07/24/2014
m-c: 2014-08-06

Gerv
Comment on attachment 8487873 [details] [diff] [review]
Patch v.1 for mozilla-aurora

Thanks for the details Gerv. Aurora+
Attachment #8487873 - Flags: approval-mozilla-aurora? → approval-mozilla-aurora+
Comment on attachment 8487874 [details] [diff] [review]
Patch v.1 for mozilla-beta

Beta+
Attachment #8487874 - Flags: approval-mozilla-beta? → approval-mozilla-beta+
Comment on attachment 8487883 [details] [diff] [review]
Patch v.1 for mozilla-esr31

It's early in the ESR31 cycle. We should take this to avoid issues for users on that channel. ESR31+
Attachment #8487883 - Flags: approval-mozilla-esr31? → approval-mozilla-esr31+
status-firefox33: --- → affected
status-firefox34: --- → affected
status-firefox35: --- → fixed
status-firefox-esr31: --- → affected
(Assignee)

Comment 8

3 years ago
Bhavana: would you take this change on b2g32 and/or b2g30?

Gerv
Flags: needinfo?(bbajaj)
Comment on attachment 8487874 [details] [diff] [review]
Patch v.1 for mozilla-beta

15 out of 23 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file netwerk/dns/effective_tld_names.dat.rej
Attachment #8487874 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #8487874 - Flags: approval-mozilla-beta+
Flags: needinfo?(gerv)
https://hg.mozilla.org/releases/mozilla-aurora/rev/b6916340fd5d
https://hg.mozilla.org/releases/mozilla-esr31/rev/09f490633c9b

Also, commit messages on the patches would have been helpful.
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Last Resolved: 3 years ago
status-b2g-v1.4: --- → affected
status-b2g-v2.0: --- → affected
status-b2g-v2.1: --- → fixed
status-b2g-v2.2: --- → fixed
status-firefox32: --- → wontfix
status-firefox34: affected → fixed
status-firefox-esr31: affected → fixed
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Target Milestone: --- → Firefox 35
(Assignee)

Comment 11

3 years ago
Sorry about the commit messages; I completely forgot.

Not sure what happened to my patch for beta - sorry about that, too. I'll redo it. 

Gerv
Flags: needinfo?(gerv)
(Assignee)

Comment 12

3 years ago
Created attachment 8488524 [details] [diff] [review]
Patch v.2 for mozilla-beta

Ah, I was stuck on a stale relbranch.

Gerv
Attachment #8488524 - Flags: approval-mozilla-beta?
(Assignee)

Comment 13

3 years ago
Created attachment 8488525 [details] [diff] [review]
Patch v.3 for mozilla-beta

...and here's one with a checkin comment :-)

Gerv
Attachment #8488524 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #8488524 - Flags: approval-mozilla-beta?
Attachment #8488525 - Flags: approval-mozilla-beta?
Comment on attachment 8488525 [details] [diff] [review]
Patch v.3 for mozilla-beta

Let's try beta again.
Attachment #8488525 - Flags: approval-mozilla-beta? → approval-mozilla-beta+
https://hg.mozilla.org/releases/mozilla-beta/rev/5b7a15b4fee2
status-firefox33: affected → fixed
Flags: qe-verify-
(In reply to Gervase Markham [:gerv] from comment #8)
> Bhavana: would you take this change on b2g32 and/or b2g30?
> 
> Gerv

Gerv, unless this is a stop-ship blocker or a chemspill level issue that we want to backport on fxos (does not look like that to ), this is likely to go in in 2.1 at the earliest
Flags: needinfo?(bbajaj)
(Assignee)

Comment 17

3 years ago
Bhavana: it's neither a shipstopper nor a chemspill. It is, however, a great ridealong if you do have a chemspill. It's overwriting a single data file, very low risk, no "porting" needed, and it makes a bunch of domains (including IDN domains) have better behaviour.

Gerv
Flags: needinfo?(bbajaj)
tracking-firefox-esr31: --- → 33+
ryan, can we please backort this to b2g32 with a =bajaj, given we took this for esr as well and gerv's input above?
Flags: needinfo?(bbajaj)
(Assignee)

Comment 19

3 years ago
ryanvm: I think comment 18 is addressed to you...

Gerv
https://hg.mozilla.org/releases/mozilla-b2g32_v2_0/rev/9acd5febc7d1
status-b2g-v1.4: affected → wontfix
status-b2g-v2.0: affected → fixed
https://hg.mozilla.org/releases/mozilla-b2g32_v2_0m/rev/9acd5febc7d1
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.