Closed Bug 678103 Opened 9 years ago Closed 9 years ago

release_sanity.py needs to be able to grok l10n-changesets_*.json

Categories

(Release Engineering :: General, defect)

defect
Not set

Tracking

(Not tracked)

RESOLVED FIXED

People

(Reporter: aki, Assigned: aki)

References

Details

(Whiteboard: [releases][automation])

Attachments

(5 files)

6.0b6 was fennec-only, so I ran

PYTHONPATH=. ../bin/python ../tools/buildbot-helpers/release_sanity.py -u aki \
-V 6.0b6 --branch mozilla-beta --build-number 1 -c release-fennec-mozilla-beta.py \
--dryrun --products fennec localhost:9001

However, Fennec uses l10n-changesets_mobile-beta.json, and release_sanity.py assumes it's a flatfile with |locale revision| per line.

I ended up having to comment out the l10n sanity checking to proceed.
https://wiki.mozilla.org/Releases/Firefox_6.0b6/BuildNotes#Build_1

We should be able to either handle an l10n-changesets or an l10n-changesets.json file here.
Priority: -- → P4
Assignee: nobody → aki
Priority: P4 → --
Comment on attachment 552463 [details] [diff] [review]
[untested] .endswith('json')

wouldn't it better if release sanity accepted something like --secondary-config, so we can check both configs and l10n changesets?
(In reply to Rail Aliiev [:rail] from comment #2)
> Comment on attachment 552463 [details] [diff] [review]
> [untested] .endswith('json')
> 
> wouldn't it better if release sanity accepted something like
> --secondary-config, so we can check both configs and l10n changesets?

Hm, why not make --release-config an append rather than a store, so we can specify multiple?
(In reply to Aki Sasaki [:aki] from comment #3)
> Hm, why not make --release-config an append rather than a store, so we can
> specify multiple?

We need to pass 1 tag to sendchange. If we have 2 configs we need to decide which one to use.
This goes through the list of config files in reverse order, which is a hacky way of making sure that the config file that's listed first is the one that's loaded in releaseConfig for the sendchange.
Comment on attachment 552723 [details] [diff] [review]
[untested] allow for multiple config files

>+    releaseConfig = None
>+    test_success = True
>+    for releaseConfigFile in list(reversed(options.releaseConfigFiles)):
>+        releaseConfig = readReleaseConfig(releaseConfigFile)
>+        if not options.version:
>+            log.warn("No version specified, using version in release_config, which may be out of date!")
>+            options.version = releaseConfig['version']
>+        if not options.buildNumber:
>+            log.warn("No buildNumber specified, using buildNumber in release_config, which may be out of date!")
>+            options.buildNumber = releaseConfig['buildNumber']

Hm, we'll be setting options.buildNumber and options.version from the *final* config file in this patch.
I think I should set a version = options.get('version', releaseConfig['version']) and same for buildNumber.
This should deal with comment 6.
We actually don't seem to be using options.version anywhere I can see other than in verify_options.

This is a lot more invasive than the first patch I posted. I'll do some testing since I'm planning on doing a staging release today/next week.
Tested in staging release.
Attachment #552798 - Flags: review?(rail)
using

PYTHONPATH=. python ../tools/buildbot-helpers/release_sanity.py -u aki -V 6.0b6 -N 1 -c staging_release-firefox-mozilla-beta.py -c staging_release-fennec-mozilla-beta.py -p firefox,fennec --branch mozilla-beta localhost:9052 2>&1 | tee ../aki.out

I also tested with

PYTHONPATH=. python ../tools/buildbot-helpers/release_sanity.py -d -u aki -V 6.0b6 -N 1 -c staging_release-fennec-mozilla-beta.py -p fennec --branch mozilla-beta localhost:9052 2>&1 | tee ../aki.out

Let me know if you have questions or want further testing.
Comment on attachment 552798 [details] [diff] [review]
[tested in staging] with bugfix, getL10nDashboardVersion fix

A nit. Remove "releaseConfig=None" from parser.set_defaults(), since you removed that option. Otherwise looks good!
Attachment #552798 - Flags: review?(rail) → review+
Comment on attachment 552798 [details] [diff] [review]
[tested in staging] with bugfix, getL10nDashboardVersion fix

http://hg.mozilla.org/build/tools/rev/7225ae5c1466
Attachment #552798 - Flags: checked-in+
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 9 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Product: mozilla.org → Release Engineering
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.