818254 - update bouncer entries automatically during postrelease

Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 916181

(Release Engineering :: Release Automation, defect, P3)

Description

[[e-mail] (:bhearsum)]

All the normal ones plus euballot and stub where applicable. Eg:
Firefox-17.0.1
Firefox-17.0.1-Complete
Firefox-17.0.1-Partial-17.0
Firefox-17.0.1-Partial-16.0.1
Firefox-latest
Firefox-release-stub
Firefox-euballot-latest

Comment 1

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

(In reply to Ben Hearsum [:bhearsum] from comment #0)
> All the normal ones plus euballot and stub where applicable. Eg:
> Firefox-17.0.1
> Firefox-17.0.1-Complete
> Firefox-17.0.1-Partial-17.0
> Firefox-17.0.1-Partial-16.0.1

Why would we touch Firefox-$version entries post-release ?

> Firefox-latest

AIUI this is handled by product-detils now. Firefox-beta-latest is still manual though, until bug 801208.

> Firefox-release-stub

Agreed, and same for Firefox-beta-stub. Could be covered by 801208 too I think.

> Firefox-euballot-latest

Currently a redirect in Apache, so you're talking about pulling that out and using the API to update ? I think bug 801208 might be best here too.

Did mention that bug 801208 is going to be all unicorns and rainbows ?

Comment 2

[[e-mail] (:bhearsum)]

(In reply to Nick Thomas [:nthomas] from comment #1)
> (In reply to Ben Hearsum [:bhearsum] from comment #0)
> > All the normal ones plus euballot and stub where applicable. Eg:
> > Firefox-17.0.1
> > Firefox-17.0.1-Complete
> > Firefox-17.0.1-Partial-17.0
> > Firefox-17.0.1-Partial-16.0.1
> 
> Why would we touch Firefox-$version entries post-release ?

Oops. Filed this bug in haste -- definitely don't need to touch these!

> > Firefox-latest
> 
> AIUI this is handled by product-detils now. Firefox-beta-latest is still
> manual though, until bug 801208.

Yeah, it seems like the "right" thing to do for everyone is to have this updated rather than using a redirect there.

> > Firefox-euballot-latest
> 
> Currently a redirect in Apache, so you're talking about pulling that out and
> using the API to update ?

Yeah. Again, this seems like the "right" thing. I could be swayed, though.

> I think bug 801208 might be best here too.
> Did mention that bug 801208 is going to be all unicorns and rainbows ?

If we're using alias', don't we still need to update where the alias points?

Comment 4

[[e-mail] (:bhearsum)]

Given how long this has sat, it doesn't look like this will be addressed anytime soon.