Closed
Bug 1103216
Opened 10 years ago
Closed 9 years ago
Remove affiliate codes from default Google plugin in en-US
Categories
(Firefox :: Search, defect, P1)
Tracking
()
People
(Reporter: kev, Assigned: kev)
References
Details
Attachments
(3 files)
28.75 KB,
patch
|
Gavin
:
review+
mfinkle
:
feedback+
|
Details | Diff | Splinter Review |
9.64 KB,
patch
|
Felipe
:
review+
|
Details | Diff | Splinter Review |
38.47 KB,
patch
|
bkerensa
:
approval-mozilla-esr31+
|
Details | Diff | Splinter Review |
Per expiration of the search agreement, the Google affiliate codes must be removed from any and all official builds. Note that Google plugins also exist in the JP and KU locales, and also need to be modified.
Attachment #8527051 -
Flags: review?(gavin.sharp)
Comment 1•10 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Kev Needham [:kev] from comment #0) > Note that Google plugins also > exist in the JP and KU locales, and also need to be modified. Flod, can we do that for 34? (Separate bug perhaps)
Flags: needinfo?(francesco.lodolo)
Comment 2•10 years ago
|
||
We will also need to adjust browser/components/search/test/browser_google_behavior.js and browser/components/search/test/browser_google.js accordingly.
Comment 3•10 years ago
|
||
Ah, bug 1103229 is already on file for ku.
Assignee | ||
Comment 4•10 years ago
|
||
For Japan, preferred approach would be to remove all the google plugins and reference the default, which Google has requested multiple times over the year.
Comment 5•10 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 8527051 [details] [diff] [review] google-us.patch f?mfinkle for the mobile/ change. It feels like there might be some value in leaving in a "from Firefox" generic parameter here, but I guess I don't feel strongly. We will also need the test changes from comment 2. I assume you are taking care of looping in whoever needs to be looped in to ensure it is consistent with partner expectations and communicate it to them as needed.
Attachment #8527051 -
Flags: review?(gavin.sharp)
Attachment #8527051 -
Flags: review+
Attachment #8527051 -
Flags: feedback?(mark.finkle)
Assignee | ||
Comment 6•10 years ago
|
||
mconnor and I talked briefly about it, but cc'ing him and Joanne to make sure they close the loop with Google. mconnor - could you verify here when we've got an Ack from Google that the change meets obligations, please and thanks?
Flags: needinfo?(mconnor)
Assignee | ||
Comment 7•10 years ago
|
||
wrt value around leaving client="firefox" in, I'll defer to BD there. They can get the same info from UA analysis, and we don't see any benefit from it that I'm aware of, but users may if it triggers anything on page rendering. Good item to also follow up with them on.
Comment 8•10 years ago
|
||
(In reply to :Gavin Sharp [email: gavin@gavinsharp.com] from comment #1) > Flod, can we do that for 34? (Separate bug perhaps) I don't think so, Firefox 35 is more likely. I think we're going to have a RC on Monday, but pushing this change doesn't feel safe (CCing also Pike). * Japanese is up to date with sign-offs, so I don't see any issue with shipping in Fx35, even happier if we drop the Japanese's variant all together. * Kurdish is quite behind with sign-offs, not sure if we're in shape to take a sign-off on beta next cycle with the updated searchplugin. Let's continue the discussion about Kurdish in bug 1103229.
Flags: needinfo?(francesco.lodolo)
Updated•9 years ago
|
status-firefox34:
--- → affected
status-firefox35:
--- → affected
status-firefox36:
--- → affected
status-firefox-esr31:
--- → affected
tracking-firefox34:
--- → +
tracking-firefox35:
--- → +
tracking-firefox36:
--- → +
tracking-firefox-esr31:
--- → 35+
Comment 9•9 years ago
|
||
Francesco, if there's any way we can fix ja we should do so, even if we need extra QA from MozJP people. This is a requirement. For everything else, this is 100% good to go. No notification needed.
Flags: needinfo?(mconnor)
Updated•9 years ago
|
Attachment #8527051 -
Flags: feedback?(mark.finkle) → feedback+
Comment 10•9 years ago
|
||
Attachment #8527742 -
Flags: review?(felipc)
Attachment #8527742 -
Flags: review?(dolske)
Updated•9 years ago
|
Attachment #8527742 -
Flags: review?(felipc) → review+
Updated•9 years ago
|
Attachment #8527742 -
Flags: review?(dolske)
Comment 11•9 years ago
|
||
https://hg.mozilla.org/releases/mozilla-release/rev/fa8744d4a55e https://hg.mozilla.org/releases/mozilla-release/rev/0e5cce2b7f29
Updated•9 years ago
|
Assignee: nobody → kev
Comment 12•9 years ago
|
||
https://hg.mozilla.org/releases/mozilla-beta/rev/fe02b53b949e https://hg.mozilla.org/releases/mozilla-beta/rev/7e8c680fcb2d
Comment 13•9 years ago
|
||
https://treeherder.mozilla.org/ui/#/jobs?repo=try&revision=7d31faa161d8 (central) https://treeherder.mozilla.org/ui/#/jobs?repo=try&revision=602e6e251617 (Aurora)
Comment 14•9 years ago
|
||
Try: https://treeherder.mozilla.org/ui/#/jobs?repo=try&revision=b232181e8006 https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/99a61ec93c5a
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 9 years ago
status-firefox37:
--- → fixed
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Target Milestone: Firefox 34 → Firefox 37
Comment 15•9 years ago
|
||
https://hg.mozilla.org/releases/mozilla-beta/rev/ec3f67354053 https://hg.mozilla.org/releases/mozilla-aurora/rev/01fd9b8b2ce0
Comment 16•9 years ago
|
||
We need to remove the Google affiliate codes from Firefox ESR builds as well. Does this patch apply cleanly to the ESR31 branch? Gavin/Ryan - Can you handle landing this today/tomorrow? Ben - We should hold off on the ESR build until we can remove the codes.
Flags: needinfo?(ryanvm)
Flags: needinfo?(gavin.sharp)
Flags: needinfo?(bkerensa)
Comment 18•9 years ago
|
||
Flags: needinfo?(gavin.sharp)
Attachment #8544245 -
Flags: approval-mozilla-esr31?
Updated•9 years ago
|
Attachment #8544245 -
Flags: approval-mozilla-esr31? → approval-mozilla-esr31+
Comment 20•9 years ago
|
||
Test failures :( https://treeherder.mozilla.org/logviewer.html#?job_id=42843&repo=mozilla-esr31
Flags: needinfo?(bkerensa) → needinfo?(gavin.sharp)
Comment 21•9 years ago
|
||
Bustage fix: https://hg.mozilla.org/releases/mozilla-esr31/rev/0a43b3f39c7f
Flags: needinfo?(gavin.sharp)
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•