Closed Bug 1137110 Opened 10 years ago Closed 10 years ago

inspector rev in client.py is using the wrong rev in comm-beta

Categories

(SeaMonkey :: Build Config, defect)

SeaMonkey 2.34 Branch
x86_64
Windows 8.1
defect
Not set
normal

Tracking

(seamonkey2.34 fixed)

RESOLVED FIXED
seamonkey2.34
Tracking Status
seamonkey2.34 --- fixed

People

(Reporter: ewong, Assigned: ewong)

Details

Attachments

(1 file, 1 obsolete file)

In comm-beta, client.py has: 27 # URL of the default hg repository to clone for DOM Inspector. 28 'INSPECTOR_REPO': 'https://hg.mozilla.org/dom-inspector/', 29 # The stable revision to use 30 'INSPECTOR_REV': 'DOMI_LATEST_RELEASE', This is not right since DOMI_LATEST_RELEASE has been updated to fix bug 1128291. Instead, c-b should (I believe) use 'SEA2_26_RELBRANCH' which doesn't have that change.
Attached patch proposed patch (v1) (obsolete) — Splinter Review
Attachment #8569712 - Flags: review?(bugspam.Callek)
Comment on attachment 8569712 [details] [diff] [review] proposed patch (v1) [Approval Request Comment] Regression caused by (bug #): bug 1128291 User impact if declined: bustage Testing completed (on m-c, etc.): Risk to taking this patch (and alternatives if risky): String changes made by this patch:
Attachment #8569712 - Flags: approval-comm-beta?
I think we will need to create a new branch. Probably from the DOMI_2_0_15 branch and based on http://hg.mozilla.org/dom-inspector/rev/6abb72a17277 as you probably need the compat vers changes.
(In reply to Ian Neal from comment #3) > I think we will need to create a new branch. Probably from the DOMI_2_0_15 > branch and based on http://hg.mozilla.org/dom-inspector/rev/6abb72a17277 as > you probably need the compat vers changes. Ratty suggested we use DOMI_2_0_15_1 as the tag. Should I go ahead and create that tag?
Flags: needinfo?(iann_bugzilla)
Attachment #8569712 - Flags: review?(bugspam.Callek)
Attachment #8569712 - Flags: approval-comm-beta?
(In reply to Edmund Wong (:ewong) from comment #4) > (In reply to Ian Neal from comment #3) > > I think we will need to create a new branch. Probably from the DOMI_2_0_15 > > branch and based on http://hg.mozilla.org/dom-inspector/rev/6abb72a17277 as > > you probably need the compat vers changes. > > Ratty suggested we use DOMI_2_0_15_1 as the tag. > > Should I go ahead and create that tag? That is fine by me, I was thinking SEA2_34_RELBRANCH but DOMI_2_0_15_1 seems okay too.
Flags: needinfo?(iann_bugzilla)
Using DOMi cset 60242bd0c895 (as tagged as DOMI_2_0_15_1)
Attachment #8569712 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #8570344 - Flags: review?(bugspam.Callek)
Attachment #8570344 - Flags: review?(bugspam.Callek) → review?(Pidgeot18)
Attachment #8570344 - Flags: review?(Pidgeot18) → review+
Comment on attachment 8570344 [details] [diff] [review] proposed patch (v2) [Approval Request Comment] Regression caused by (bug #): 1128291 User impact if declined: bustage during osx64 build. Testing completed (on m-c, etc.): Risk to taking this patch (and alternatives if risky): String changes made by this patch:
Attachment #8570344 - Flags: approval-comm-beta?
Comment on attachment 8570344 [details] [diff] [review] proposed patch (v2) Review of attachment 8570344 [details] [diff] [review]: ----------------------------------------------------------------- Ah, sure, this is for beta, so I should have set this a+ right away :)
Attachment #8570344 - Flags: approval-comm-beta? → approval-comm-beta+
Status: ASSIGNED → RESOLVED
Closed: 10 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Target Milestone: --- → seamonkey2.34
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.

Attachment

General

Created:
Updated:
Size: