update _version.py according to the new versioning system

RESOLVED WONTFIX

Status

Add-on SDK
General
P2
normal
RESOLVED WONTFIX
5 years ago
4 years ago

People

(Reporter: wbamberg, Unassigned)

Tracking

Firefox Tracking Flags

(Not tracked)

Details

Attachments

(1 attachment)

(Reporter)

Description

5 years ago
While the SDK shipped independently of Firefox, it had its own versioning system. Specific revision of the source were tagged according to this system, and the _version.py module in cfx parsed a version identifier out of the tag. This version identifier was used for two things:

* it was written into the harness-options.json file for add-ons, to indicate the version of the SDK that was used for this add-on

* it was used by the doc generation code to insert a version identifier into the documentation pages, so readers could work out which version of the SKD any given doc page referred to

Now that the SDK APIs are in Firefox, we have changed the versioning system, and the corresponding tagging, according to this proposal: https://github.com/mozilla/addon-sdk/wiki/JP-version-JEP.

We need to decide what we want to write into harness-options.json: whether it should indicate the version of cfx used to build the add-on, or the version of Firefox containing the revision of the APIs that the add-on uses (although this doesn't make a lot of sense when the add-on doesn't package the APIs), or something else.

We then need to update _version.py accordingly.

(For the documentation specifically: in the short-term we will just remove the dependency on _version.py and supply a Firefox version identifier when building the doc release. We will only need a way to parse a version identifier from a GitHub tag when we start to automate building doc releases, which won't happen for a while, so ought to be out of scope for this bug.)
Created attachment 739685 [details]
Pointer to Github pull request: https://github.com/mozilla/addon-sdk/pull/955

Pointer to Github pull-request
Comment on attachment 739685 [details]
Pointer to Github pull request: https://github.com/mozilla/addon-sdk/pull/955

Here's a strawman proposal with a patch, it doesn't quite match our current tagging plan though.
Attachment #739685 - Flags: feedback?(wbamberg)
Attachment #739685 - Flags: feedback?(kwierso)
Comment on attachment 739685 [details]
Pointer to Github pull request: https://github.com/mozilla/addon-sdk/pull/955

I'm down with changing the way we tag things if that's easier.
Attachment #739685 - Flags: feedback?(kwierso) → feedback+
(Reporter)

Comment 4

5 years ago
Comment on attachment 739685 [details]
Pointer to Github pull request: https://github.com/mozilla/addon-sdk/pull/955

So in this proposal, are we writing the Firefox version into harness-options.json? This seems weird because, as you said before, the add-on itself won't contain the libraries any more. I'm a bit unclear what the harness-options value is used for, and without that, it's hard to know what it should be :).
(In reply to Will Bamberg [:wbamberg] from comment #4)
> Comment on attachment 739685 [details]
> Pointer to Github pull request: https://github.com/mozilla/addon-sdk/pull/955
> 
> So in this proposal, are we writing the Firefox version into
> harness-options.json? This seems weird because, as you said before, the
> add-on itself won't contain the libraries any more. I'm a bit unclear what
> the harness-options value is used for, and without that, it's hard to know
> what it should be :).

As far as I know the only thing that the version is harness-options is used for is to tell us (and maybe AMO) the version of the SDK that the add-on was built with. Since we are now versioning the SDK with the Firefox version it ships with putting that number into harness-options will tell us which version of cfx built the XPI. That number plus the version of Firefox that an add-on is running it tells us what built the add-on and what modules the add-on is using.

It's also possible to build the add-on so it ignores Firefox's modules, that option appears in harness-options too and so in that case the version tells us both what built the XPI and what modules it is using.

Updated

5 years ago
Priority: -- → P2

Updated

5 years ago
Blocks: 885448
AMO are currently rejecting add-ons with sdkVersion=unknown.
(Reporter)

Comment 7

4 years ago
Comment on attachment 739685 [details]
Pointer to Github pull request: https://github.com/mozilla/addon-sdk/pull/955

Sorry this feedback request took me 9 months :(.
Attachment #739685 - Flags: feedback?(wbamberg) → feedback+
Land this or close it when you get a chance please Dave.
Flags: needinfo?(dtownsend+bugmail)
Given that we've stopped producing regular SDKs I don't think this is needed anymore
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Last Resolved: 4 years ago
Flags: needinfo?(dtownsend+bugmail)
Resolution: --- → WONTFIX
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.