1852959 - consider updating latest-esr alias' to newer esr version sooner

Status: RESOLVED WONTFIX

(Release Engineering :: Release Automation, enhancement)

Description

[[e-mail] (:bhearsum)]

Right now, esr-latest continues to point at the older ESR version until we stop shipping it, and we have esr-next-latest in this period to point at the newer ESR version.

There's probably a reason why we've done it like this, but it's awfully confusing to have something called latest pointing at something that is not the latest (merely the latest of its branch).

One alternative here might be to get rid of esr-latest altogether and use latest alias' with esr numbers in them, eg: esr102-latest.

Comment 1

[[e-mail] (:bhearsum)]

I want mkaply's input here - but I can't needinfo him at the moment. Flagging myself or now, so I don't forget...

Comment 2

[Julien Cristau [:jcristau]]

Having the version number in there would defeat the purpose of the alias, IMO, which is that consumers like bedrock don't have to worry about updating them each year.

Comment 3

[Julien Cristau [:jcristau]]

This also matches product-details where FIREFOX_ESR is currently 102.15.1esr and FIREFOX_ESR_NEXT is 115.2.1esr.

Comment 4

[[e-mail] (:bhearsum)]

(In reply to Julien Cristau [:jcristau] from comment #3)

This also matches product-details where FIREFOX_ESR is currently 102.15.1esr and FIREFOX_ESR_NEXT is 115.2.1esr.

Good call out. If we change anything here I'd imagine we'd want to change it there too.

Comment 5

[Julien Cristau [:jcristau]]

My vote would be to not change anything FWIW, esr is always the "main" esr branch, and when it reaches eol, esr-next becomes esr. I'll agree it can be confusing if you don't know about the two branches, but ultimately I'm not convinced that's avoidable given the overlap, any name is going to confuse someone during that period.

Comment 6

[[e-mail] (:bhearsum)]

I'm fine with that, especially after learning about product details doing the same thing.