Closed Bug 717117 (SM2.6.1-MU) Opened 12 years ago Closed 12 years ago

Tracking bug for build and release of SeaMonkey 2.6.1 MU [Major Update]

Categories

(SeaMonkey :: Release Engineering, defect, P1)

SeaMonkey 2.6 Branch
defect

Tracking

(Not tracked)

RESOLVED FIXED
seamonkey2.6

People

(Reporter: ewong, Assigned: Callek)

References

()

Details

Attachments

(2 files, 3 obsolete files)

+++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #688958 +++

+++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #682739 +++

+++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #668741 +++

For SeaMonkey 2.6.1 we want Major Updates to come from 1.9.1 (SeaMonkey 2.0)

This bug is intended to track that.
Attachment #587555 - Flags: review?(bugspam.Callek)
a better diff.
Attachment #587555 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #587555 - Flags: review?(bugspam.Callek)
Attachment #587556 - Flags: review?(bugspam.Callek)
Blocks: SM2.6.1
No longer blocks: SM2.4
fixed a search/replace fallacy
Attachment #587556 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #587556 - Flags: review?(bugspam.Callek)
Attachment #587565 - Flags: review?(bugspam.Callek)
Attachment #587565 - Flags: review?(bugspam.Callek)
Search/replace screwed up the previous patches.  This new patch fixes that.
Attachment #587565 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #587567 - Flags: review?(bugspam.Callek)
Ftr, do we actually want to MU to 2.6.1,
when bug 695309 won't be fixed until at least 2.7?

I understand SM 2.4.1 is "old" now, (and that not everyone uses NNTP,)
but bug 695309 is not even listed at
http://www.seamonkey-project.org/releases/seamonkey2.6/#issues :-/
(In reply to Serge Gautherie (:sgautherie) from comment #5)
> Ftr, do we actually want to MU to 2.6.1,
> when bug 695309 won't be fixed until at least 2.7?

Immaterial, for this discussion, we fix many other issues, and yea that bug is a problem, but if there is a reason to respin 2.6 we'll do that, otherwise it will be fixed by end of month, and if we update users to 2.6.1 now, they'll get 2.7 when its out as well.

Also fwiw, this is for updates from 2.0.14, not 2.4.1, we're just making it so that users on 2.0.14 have less steps to get updated if they try.
Comment on attachment 587567 [details] [diff] [review]
Update patcher-config for 2.0.14 to 2.6.1.(v4)

This looks good, I'll land it when we're ready. (with other patch)
Attachment #587567 - Flags: review?(bugspam.Callek) → review+
Attachment #587602 - Flags: review?(bugspam.Callek)
Attachment #587602 - Flags: review?(bugspam.Callek) → review+
$ patch -p0 < patch.diff && cvs ci -m "Bug 717117 -- Update patched configs for
 another installment of Major Update"
patching file moz191-seamonkey-branch-major-patcher2.cfg
cvs commit: Examining .
? patch.diff
Checking in moz191-seamonkey-branch-major-patcher2.cfg;
/cvsroot/mozilla/tools/patcher-configs/moz191-seamonkey-branch-major-patcher2.cf
g,v  <--  moz191-seamonkey-branch-major-patcher2.cfg
new revision: 1.19; previous revision: 1.18
done
(In reply to Justin Wood (:Callek) from comment #6)

> otherwise it will be fixed by end of month, and if we update users to 2.6.1
> now, they'll get 2.7 when its out as well.

In this 1st case, my point was to avoid the 2.6.1 update to go directly from 2.0.14 to 2.7.

> Also fwiw, this is for updates from 2.0.14, not 2.4.1, we're just making it
> so that users on 2.0.14 have less steps to get updated if they try.

In this 2nd case, my point was that current MU from 2.0.14 is currently to 2.4.1 (which doesn't suffer from bug 695309).

***

Anyway, I do believe a "Data loss warning : bug 695309" should be added to the 2.6(.1) Release Notes page !
Alias: SM2.6.1-MU
Assignee: nobody → bugspam.Callek
No longer depends on: SM2.4-MU
This should be live now
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 12 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Target Milestone: --- → seamonkey2.6
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.

Attachment

General

Created:
Updated:
Size: