Rel maintains compatibility with Firefox's release and beta branches. Stab maintains compatibility with Firefox's beta and aurora branches. Dev maintains compatibility with aurora and central branches.
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "mozilla-labs-jetpack" group.
To post to this group, send email to mozilla-la...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to mozilla-labs-jet...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/mozilla-labs-jetpack?hl=en.
Also, IIRC, release and stabilization branches don't cover all four
branches of Firefox either. Which was the only thing I was missing from
whole current setup.
In those days spirits were brave, the stakes were high, men were
real men, women were real women and small furry creatures from
Alpha Centauri were real small furry creatures from Alpha
-- Douglas Adams
So what is the takeaway here.. I am not sure what we should do to respond to this? What is the proposed workaround, should we change our build script to search / replace across that one file ? Or is there going to be a revert on github, until a longer term solution has been developed. --Given that y'all're continuously integrating Apps with the SDK master branch, which is a great thing... yes, I'm inclined to revert the change on that branch, setting the Firefox minVersion to the current release version of Firefox (currently 7.0.1, although I'd probably set minVersion to 7.0) on the SDK master branch while leaving minVersion on the SDK stabilization and release branches at their current values, as determined by the current policy.
I don't think we have real limitation from the code itself, the only limitation I'm aware of is this old bug that has been fixed in a beta of 4.0.
So it is more about automatic testing because we just suppose it is working on old 4.0bx+ version. Then it sounds more like a continuous integration issue than anything else. I mean, if our continuous integration works fine and is simple to run/maintain, this kind of testing won't cost much.
I may have simplify things too much and in that case we still have to round corners of this change.
Because it is far from being clear that "cfx xpi" build an addon that won't work on the same firefox binary you used during "cfx test/run".
David: are your tests passing again after this change? And is there a
dashboard where we can see the results of your tests?
Nor is there a wildcard in the minVersion value on the stabilization
from which we'll spin the next stable release.
There is a wildcard in the maxVersion on that branch. But that's
expected and accepted by AMO.
Yeah - that was me, I put the splat there because I was unsure (when I
wrote it) if myk had gone with 7.0 or 7.0.1. I should have updated it
when he let us know in the meeting!
Thanks for noticing that though. Its good to be correct