Closed Bug 913200 Opened 7 years ago Closed 6 years ago

Migrate mozmill-tests for Firefox 24

Categories

(Mozilla QA Graveyard :: Mozmill Tests, defect)

defect
Not set

Tracking

(Not tracked)

RESOLVED FIXED

People

(Reporter: ashughes, Assigned: AndreeaMatei)

Details

Attachments

(3 files, 4 obsolete files)

This bug tracks the work to migrate mozmill-tests branches in preparation for Firefox 24's release. For reference, the Firefox branches will be migrating as follows:

Monday, September 9, 2013:
 * mozilla-beta merges to mozilla-release for Firefox 24
 * Firefox 24RC, 17esr RC, and 24 ESR RC go to build

Monday, September 16, 2013: 
 * mozilla-aurora merges to mozilla-beta for Firefox 25, beta 1 goes to build
 * mozilla-central merges to mozilla-aurora for Firefox 26, updates disabled
 * mozilla-central version bumped to Firefox 27

Tuesday, September 17, 2013:
 * Firefox 24, 17esr, and 24esr released

Thursday, September 18, 2013:
 * Firefox 25.0b1 released

Friday, September 19, 2013:
 * Firefox 26.0a2 updates enabled on the aurora channel
Thank you Anthony for filing this bug. We would like to put Andrei and Andreea on this task for this merge. I would suggest Andreea is working on the patch and Andrei can review and test it. I will actually do the merge on Monday if it will happen late evening (Europe).
Assignee: nobody → andreea.matei
Status: NEW → ASSIGNED
Attachment #800802 - Attachment description: merge.patch → Beta-Release-merge.patch
It seems 0b9 is not yet out in the public channel, so this is expected
Comment on attachment 800802 [details] [diff] [review]
Beta-Release-merge.patch

Review of attachment 800802 [details] [diff] [review]:
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Big merge :)
We've run lots of tests, this should be good.
Attachment #800802 - Flags: review?(andrei.eftimie) → review+
Comment on attachment 800802 [details] [diff] [review]
Beta-Release-merge.patch

Review of attachment 800802 [details] [diff] [review]:
-----------------------------------------------------------------

That's indeed large! Quick question, have you gotten any merge conflicts?

::: .hgtags
@@ +95,5 @@
> +4c88cc4deae4d4a0617d0e82a6b87fba9a3c65df BETA_BASE_20130805
> +6d9c05b7f35f5efa59164f3590e9239d3562e4bf RELEASE_BASE_20130805
> +0000000000000000000000000000000000000000 RELEASE_BASE_20130805
> +eed4d1de6f9889166585164e4f6ddba4a5602e79 FIREFOX_BETA_24.0
> +c5db4e89e35dadc522293e1b1168446a0c1e2645 RELEASE_BASE_20130906

I think we should leave the .hgtags file out here, given that it will get a change. This should be added before merging the patch.
Yep, there were 27 conflicts, mostly regarding changes from bug 886811.
Some notes:

1) I've also done the merge and compared my resulting patch to Andreea's (we've caught a couple initial merge problems that way).

2) I was a bit worried for the .hgtags file, we say in the docs that we're always have conflict, and we do. I've compared this one to the last merge's .hgtags and it looks *ok* (If we adding the tags as in the docs: one prior to the merge on one branch and one after it on the other.

Should we add the new tag *after* the merge?
You do not add any tags nor make modifications to the .hgtags file. Both things have to be covered when we actually do the merge. So as said earlier in comment 5 leave it out of the patch.
Attached patch mergeBeta-Release.patch (obsolete) — Splinter Review
Updated so that we don't change .hgtags for the moment.
Attachment #800802 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #801461 - Flags: review?(andrei.eftimie)
Comment on attachment 801461 [details] [diff] [review]
mergeBeta-Release.patch

Looks good.

Henrik, so the .hgtags file will be merged separately?
Attachment #801461 - Flags: review?(andrei.eftimie) → review+
I think the tag for beta will be separate and the rest added when the patch is imported, before getting pushed. So it will end up together.
Updated after the skip patch from bug 818128.
Attachment #801461 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #801656 - Flags: review?(hskupin)
Comment on attachment 801656 [details] [diff] [review]
beta-release (Patch v2)

Can we please come back with version numbers for patches? Having the same name here is confusing.  Also interdiff doesn't work so I have to do the diff locally.
Attachment #801656 - Attachment description: mergeBeta-Release.patch → Patch v2
Comment on attachment 801656 [details] [diff] [review]
beta-release (Patch v2)

Review of attachment 801656 [details] [diff] [review]:
-----------------------------------------------------------------

So interdiff didn't work because no change has been made to this patch in terms of actual code changes. Only changeset ids and dates have been updated. That means a new version of the patch was not necessary. Spot-checked and it looks fine. Lets get in once we get the feedback from Anthony.
Attachment #801656 - Flags: review?(hskupin) → review+
Attachment #801656 - Attachment description: Patch v2 → beta-release (Patch v2)
mozilla-beta->mozilla-release Firefox migration should take place around 2pm Pacific today
Comment on attachment 801656 [details] [diff] [review]
beta-release (Patch v2)

Review of attachment 801656 [details] [diff] [review]:
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Merge for beta -> release done:
http://hg.mozilla.org/qa/mozmill-tests/rev/c0ddba6433d5 (Added tag RELEASE_BASE_20130909 for changeset 92af909ac97f)
http://hg.mozilla.org/qa/mozmill-tests/rev/fbf58819a0d5 (Merge mozilla-beta to mozilla-release for Firefox 24.0 )
http://hg.mozilla.org/qa/mozmill-tests/rev/1b57be0d8c28 (Added tag FIREFOX_RELEASE_24.0 for changeset fbf58819a0d5)
Attachment #801656 - Flags: checkin+
Btw. I have updated the docs for the merge from beta -> release if a merge patch is existent. Please let me know if that works and if its the case, would you mind to add the same for the other branches, Andreea?
Oh and in the future the merge patch could probably also include the tag from the source branch. Lets check that with the next merge.
Yep, sounds right to me to have that case explained as well. I'll update the rest of them, sure.

The source tag can be added indeed, I've let it out this time cause I thought it's needed to be added right when the merge is done.

Thanks for the help Henrik!
Something I missed and Andreea pointed out on IRC, there was no mozilla-esr24 branch in the mozmill-tests repository. Have created that now and all tests are passing again:

http://hg.mozilla.org/qa/mozmill-tests/rev/25ae88648620
Patch for merging mozilla-aurora to mozilla-beta.
Hope it's ok with .hgtags, I added both what was in mozilla-aurora and the tag for beta. Tested across platforms.
Attachment #805268 - Flags: review?(andrei.eftimie)
Attached patch mergeDefault-Aurora.patch (obsolete) — Splinter Review
Merge patch for default to mozilla-aurora.
Attachment #805270 - Flags: review?(andrei.eftimie)
Comment on attachment 805268 [details] [diff] [review]
merge-Aurora-Beta.patch

Review of attachment 805268 [details] [diff] [review]:
-----------------------------------------------------------------

::: .hgtags
@@ +95,5 @@
>  eed4d1de6f9889166585164e4f6ddba4a5602e79 FIREFOX_BETA_24.0
>  92af909ac97fcbaa538463ff1f33cfbd420e2083 RELEASE_BASE_20130909
> +268fa396a2b6557744576245f2cf6bac91a3c61c AURORA_BASE_20130805
> +393c4491bb95d60632984433bbd8f56a4f249032 FIREFOX_AURORA_25.0
> +0775c37b05dca43acbdfd9f8b88dd6a2aaa684fc FIREFOX_BETA_25.0

The problem here might still be that the new Aurora base tag you have created has not been pushed yet to our repository. That means that no-one else can land this patch. But lets see how it will work out.
Will we be making the merge earlier than midnight? I can eventually leave the .hgtags out as with the previous patch.
I agree that we should save our flexibility here.

Either one of us should be able to push the merge (and manually add the tags should not be a problem).
Comment on attachment 805268 [details] [diff] [review]
merge-Aurora-Beta.patch

Review of attachment 805268 [details] [diff] [review]:
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Looks good to me.
Also done the merge separately and compared the resulting patches.
Ran tests against OSX, works fine.

Giving an r+

We should decide what we are doing with the .hgtags file.
Attachment #805268 - Flags: review?(andrei.eftimie) → review+
Comment on attachment 805270 [details] [diff] [review]
mergeDefault-Aurora.patch

Review of attachment 805270 [details] [diff] [review]:
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Small merge, looks good!
Attachment #805270 - Flags: review?(andrei.eftimie) → review+
mozilla-aurora -> mozilla-beta
------------------------------
http://hg.mozilla.org/qa/mozmill-tests/rev/e714ef6d5247 (BETA_BASE_20130916)
http://hg.mozilla.org/qa/mozmill-tests/rev/aa944edc03e9 (Merge mozilla-aurora to mozilla-beta for Firefox 25.0 and tag FIREFOX_BETA_25.0)
http://hg.mozilla.org/qa/mozmill-tests/rev/74514a904e71 (tag FIREFOX_BETA_25.0)

According to the email regarding the merges, default->mozilla-aurora might not happen today.
Attached patch mergeDefault-Aurora.patch (obsolete) — Splinter Review
Updated so we don't touch .hgtags, those will be added separately.
Attachment #805270 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #805434 - Flags: review?(andrei.eftimie)
Comment on attachment 805434 [details] [diff] [review]
mergeDefault-Aurora.patch

Review of attachment 805434 [details] [diff] [review]:
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Looks good!
Attachment #805434 - Flags: review?(andrei.eftimie) → review+
Updated the patch again, we've unskiped the 4 addons tests and the FTP test due to fixes on that part.

The bug blocking this merge was fixed, merge day is over so here is the last one:

default -> mozilla-aurora
-------------------------

http://hg.mozilla.org/qa/mozmill-tests/rev/203211910e1a (Added tag AURORA_BASE_20130917)
http://hg.mozilla.org/qa/mozmill-tests/rev/7508d946fd80 (Merged default to mozilla-aurora for Firefox 26.0)
http://hg.mozilla.org/qa/mozmill-tests/rev/52f03ea89569 (Added tag FIREFOX_AURORA_26.0)
Attachment #805434 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #806024 - Flags: review+
I think all looks fine. Lets get it closed when you are done with everything here.
Status: ASSIGNED → RESOLVED
Closed: 6 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Product: Mozilla QA → Mozilla QA Graveyard
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.