760397 - TB source builder should set COMM_REV and MOZILLA_REV to get right source

Status: RESOLVED FIXED

(Release Engineering :: Release Automation, defect, P2)

Description

[Nick Thomas [:nthomas] (UTC+12)]

In TB 10.0.5 ESR build2 we got the following revs after client.py was called at the top of the configure step of the source builder:

comm-esr10:    69c7c9323103 (GECKO1005_2012053119_RELBRANCH) tip
mozilla-esr10: dd21a1df7b1e

The first is fine if you expect to have the tip of the relbranch to get the tags changesets. The second is bad because it's tip of the default branch, instead of the relbranch (GECKO1005_2012053118_RELBRANCH). Today this only a version difference (10.0.6esrpre vs 10.0.5) but it needn't be so benign.

Setting COMM_REV and MOZILLA_REV to the RELEASE tag will get us the right code, even if we lose the changesets for the tags until we can come up with a better solution.

Comment 1

[Nick Thomas [:nthomas] (UTC+12)]

Attachment: [buildbotcustom] modify environment

Comment 2

[Mark Banner (:standard8)]

Comment on attachment 629118 [details] [diff] [review]
[buildbotcustom] modify environment

Looks fine, r=me.

Comment 3

[Nick Thomas [:nthomas] (UTC+12)]

Comment on attachment 629118 [details] [diff] [review]
[buildbotcustom] modify environment

Double landed, here's production:
 http://hg.mozilla.org/build/buildbotcustom/rev/83fd5c0b5818

Comment 4

[Nick Thomas [:nthomas] (UTC+12)]

Worked in build3. 

Now we just need to figure out if we care enough about not having the changesets for the tags in the source tarball.

Comment 5

[Nick Thomas [:nthomas] (UTC+12)]

Standard8, perhaps we should file a followup about comment #4 if you think it's worth fixing ?

Comment 6

[Mark Banner (:standard8)]

(In reply to Nick Thomas [:nthomas] from comment #5)
> Standard8, perhaps we should file a followup about comment #4 if you think
> it's worth fixing ?

Does this affect source tarballs or hg bundles? I'm just trying to figure it out, as I thought the source tarball was just source. So in theory the source tarball should be the revision of the tags, but the hg bundles should include the tag...

Comment 7

[Nick Thomas [:nthomas] (UTC+12)]

(In reply to Mark Banner (:standard8) from comment #6)
> Does this affect source tarballs or hg bundles? 

Just the bundles I think.

> I'm just trying to figure it
> out, as I thought the source tarball was just source. So in theory the
> source tarball should be the revision of the tags, but the hg bundles should
> include the tag...

Right, in a perfect world.

Comment 8

[[e-mail] (:bhearsum)]

Is this still an issue?

Comment 9

[Nick Thomas [:nthomas] (UTC+12)]

Turns we're done here. The patch gets the correct mozilla-beta/mozilla-release code into the source tarball. The hg bundle for Thunderbird releases is the comm-beta/comm-release repo, and that gets handled the same as mozilla-beta/mozilla-release for Firefox releases. ie we pull, update to the _RELEASE tag, then do 'hg up -C' to get the tagging changeset.