Closed
Bug 817811
Opened 12 years ago
Closed 12 years ago
panda builds against gaia-central
Categories
(Release Engineering :: General, defect)
Tracking
(Not tracked)
RESOLVED
FIXED
People
(Reporter: mozilla, Assigned: bhearsum)
References
Details
Attachments
(3 files)
2.09 KB,
patch
|
catlee
:
review+
ted
:
review+
lsblakk
:
approval-mozilla-aurora+
lsblakk
:
approval-mozilla-beta+
bhearsum
:
checked-in+
|
Details | Diff | Splinter Review |
1.16 KB,
patch
|
mozilla
:
review+
bhearsum
:
checked-in+
|
Details | Diff | Splinter Review |
1.65 KB,
patch
|
mozilla
:
review+
bhearsum
:
checked-in+
|
Details | Diff | Splinter Review |
Ideally on gaia-central change.
I've been saying this won't be part of Dec10, but would be helpful for Gaia developers.
Assignee | ||
Comment 1•12 years ago
|
||
I'm pretty sure this is simple. Patches incoming.
Assignee | ||
Comment 2•12 years ago
|
||
I originally wanted to do this by adding a panda-gaia gecko config, but that would end up duplicating everything in https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/file/740982d30458/b2g/config/panda, just to change the gaia repo path. Catlee/Aki, how you two feel about adding a --gaia-repo flag to b2g_build.py that would override the gecko config? If we did that, we'd just have to change the mozharness script args in b2g_config.py. I'm happy either way, just not sure what's more sensible.
Flags: needinfo?(aki)
Assignee | ||
Updated•12 years ago
|
Flags: needinfo?(catlee)
Reporter | ||
Comment 4•12 years ago
|
||
Sheriffs: How would we display these builds on TBPL?
Effectively, the gecko (mozilla-_____) revision may stay the same, while we build against multiple versions of gaia-central.
Should we show multiple builds on the same row of TBPL, or have a gaia-central tree, or ?
Flags: needinfo?(edmorley.bz)
Assignee | ||
Comment 5•12 years ago
|
||
I tried adjusting b2g_build.py to override the Gaia repo. It ended up more hacky than duplicating the configs (to my eyes, at least), because I was still reading the VCS from the Gaia config.
Flags: needinfo?(catlee)
Assignee | ||
Comment 6•12 years ago
|
||
Catlee, are you OK with this approach?
Ted, is using symlinks here OK, or should I be making copies of the files instead?
Attachment #688214 -
Flags: review?(ted)
Attachment #688214 -
Flags: review?(catlee)
Assignee | ||
Comment 7•12 years ago
|
||
This will get this builder added to every branch, including Try. I'm not really sure if this adds value on Try or if it will just cause wasted CPU time. What do you think?
Attachment #688215 -
Flags: review?(aki)
Comment 8•12 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 688214 [details] [diff] [review]
add new configs
Review of attachment 688214 [details] [diff] [review]:
-----------------------------------------------------------------
We've used symlinks before. As long as we aren't going to use them on Windows they should be fine.
Attachment #688214 -
Flags: review?(ted) → review+
Comment 9•12 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Aki Sasaki [:aki] from comment #4)
> Sheriffs: How would we display these builds on TBPL?
>
> Effectively, the gecko (mozilla-_____) revision may stay the same, while we
> build against multiple versions of gaia-central.
>
> Should we show multiple builds on the same row of TBPL, or have a
> gaia-central tree, or ?
Honestly - I don't know.
Aiui jetpack does the latter (Addon-sdk tree on TBPL), so maybe go with that?
Ultimately until we have the Futurama re-write of TBPL, this kind of scenario is not something it supports very well.
Is the version of m-c built going to remain constant? (If so, a separate tree is preferable). If not (and it's going to update m-c to tip all the time / the gaia repo updates are much less frequent), then perhaps showing multiple builds on the usual m-c tree is best.
Perhaps this decision is best as a newsgroup or email thread with sheriffs, ateam, releng & jetpack (so we can see how the separate tree setup works for them) CCed?
Flags: needinfo?(edmorley.bz)
Reporter | ||
Comment 10•12 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 688215 [details] [diff] [review]
add builders
I think this works.
Aiui this will build on gecko change rather than on gaia change, but will give more granularity than building against gaia-nightly.
Re: try, I think that's even more reason we need to be able to have builders on try that aren't part of 'all'.
Attachment #688215 -
Flags: review?(aki) → review+
Assignee | ||
Comment 11•12 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Ed Morley [UTC+0; email:edmorley@moco] from comment #9)
> Perhaps this decision is best as a newsgroup or email thread with sheriffs,
> ateam, releng & jetpack (so we can see how the separate tree setup works for
> them) CCed?
This might be a better question for Gaia devs. As I understand it, these builds are for their benefit, not platform or firefox devs'.
Reporter | ||
Comment 12•12 years ago
|
||
Aiui we'll be building on gecko checkin rather than on gaia-checkin, which makes my original question moot.
Updated•12 years ago
|
Attachment #688214 -
Flags: review?(catlee) → review+
Assignee | ||
Comment 13•12 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 688214 [details] [diff] [review]
add new configs
Landed on mozilla-central: https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/2c4bf8261005
Drivers, requesting approval for this patch so we can have panda Gaia builds that track the tip of Gaia (as opposed to the curated Nightly branch) on aurora and beta. These builds are for Gaia developers' benefit, and separate from the existing panda builds.
Attachment #688214 -
Flags: checked-in+
Attachment #688214 -
Flags: approval-mozilla-beta?
Attachment #688214 -
Flags: approval-mozilla-aurora?
Updated•12 years ago
|
Attachment #688214 -
Flags: approval-mozilla-beta?
Attachment #688214 -
Flags: approval-mozilla-beta+
Attachment #688214 -
Flags: approval-mozilla-aurora?
Attachment #688214 -
Flags: approval-mozilla-aurora+
Assignee | ||
Comment 14•12 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 688214 [details] [diff] [review]
add new configs
Aurora: https://hg.mozilla.org/releases/mozilla-aurora/rev/73e91dd0d308
Beta: https://hg.mozilla.org/releases/mozilla-beta/rev/556fec7b4673
Assignee | ||
Comment 15•12 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 688215 [details] [diff] [review]
add builders
Landed. Will be in production shortly. Not 100% sure if TBPL support is there yet.
Attachment #688215 -
Flags: checked-in+
Assignee | ||
Comment 16•12 years ago
|
||
Whoops, forgot to add this to the default set of platforms!
Reporter | ||
Updated•12 years ago
|
Attachment #689264 -
Flags: review?(aki) → review+
Assignee | ||
Updated•12 years ago
|
Attachment #689264 -
Flags: checked-in+
Assignee | ||
Comment 17•12 years ago
|
||
Modulo bug 820165, this is done. It's not done on gaia change, but we don't have a mechanism to do that yet.
Status: ASSIGNED → RESOLVED
Closed: 12 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Updated•12 years ago
|
Product: mozilla.org → Release Engineering
Updated•7 years ago
|
Component: General Automation → General
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•