Basically like Firefox, except different product name. It should only work for mozilla-beta. Here's some places I'm pretty sure need to be updated: Need new form: https://github.com/mozilla-releng/ship-it/blob/master/kickoff/views/forms.py#L336 https://github.com/mozilla-releng/ship-it/blob/master/kickoff/views/submit.py#L27 https://github.com/mozilla-releng/ship-it/blob/master/kickoff/templates/release.html New version of https://github.com/mozilla-releng/ship-it/blob/master/kickoff/templates/includes/firefox_release.html DB schema: https://github.com/mozilla-releng/ship-it/tree/master/migrate_repo/versions, https://github.com/mozilla-releng/ship-it/blob/master/kickoff/model.py#L187 https://github.com/mozilla-releng/ship-it/blob/master/kickoff/templates/submit_release.html#L18 https://github.com/mozilla-releng/ship-it/blob/master/kickoff/static/global_config.js https://github.com/mozilla-releng/ship-it/blob/master/kickoff/static/suggestions.js#L242 pull devedition changesets from firefox part of elmo I dunno if partial autosuggestion is going to work out of box, or at all.

Paul, Matt As you know, we are dropping Aurora in favour of building Dev Edition off of mozilla-beta. This means that we are going to use the same versions and locales for Dev Edition and Beta. I know that we export some release data from ship-it to product-details and it's used in Bedrock and Bouncer tests via https://github.com/mozilla/product-details-json/. How do you feel if we completely drop FIREFOX_AURORA from the exports? This will affect at least: 1) https://product-details.mozilla.org/1.0/firefox_primary_builds.json: there will be no "a2" in that list 2) https://product-details.mozilla.org/1.0/firefox_versions.json: there will be no FIREFOX_AURORA in the list 3) https://product-details.mozilla.org/1.0/mobile_versions.json and https://product-details.mozilla.org/1.0/mobile_details.json: alpha_version and nightly_version will be the same or we can kill one of them

From a go-bouncer test perspective this would be a simple change to update the tests to handle this update. I don't foresee a problem. Needs info'ing oremj on this discussion as well.

FTR, I submitted a PR https://github.com/mozilla-releng/ship-it/pull/167 that should just work.

This will be fine, but it needs to land in product-details production only AFTER we make changes to bedrock. This will break pages on the site that are looking for the FIREFOX_AURORA versions. To sum up; I'm +1 on the change, but it needs to wait until after Aurora is fully gone from bedrock.

I think we can keep AURORA_VERSION hardcoded there until then then.

(In reply to Rail Aliiev [:rail] ⌚️ET from comment #5) > I think we can keep AURORA_VERSION hardcoded there until then then. As long as builds for that version also continue to appear in firefox_primary_builds.json as well then it should work fine.

This is deployed now.

I believe this has broken product-details updates on www.m.o. I see in `firefox-versions.json`: "FIREFOX_AURORA": "54.0a2", But there are no builds for that version in `firefox-primary-builds.json`.

Hmm, I don't think that the value of FIREFOX_AURORA has been changed by this commit... Should we just kill that check? I mean remove https://github.com/mozilla/product-details-json/blob/b8b179c23855588f30f9e9c118141e78c80d3f9a/update-product-details.py#L15

We definitely can't do that since Developer Edition is still available for download on the site and we still use data from product-details to provide that. My recommendation would be to simply repurpose the AURORA stuff to mean Developer Edition in any form it takes. It means that now while it's based on Aurora, and it makes sense for it to keep meaning that when it's based on Beta. That would mean little to no modifications needed to anything using product-details data to provide info on Developer Edition. An example of our use of the data is this page: https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/developer/all/ It gets the list of platforms and locales available for download for Developer Edition (Aurora) from the product-details data in `firefox-versions.json` and `firefox-primary-builds.json`.

https://github.com/mozilla-releng/ship-it/commit/899e20a4beca43530f854f1b61105bd88c13b89e should address the issue. It should be synced to product-details.m.o in a bit.

https://ci.us-west.moz.works/blue/organizations/jenkins/product-details-json-watch/activity and https://github.com/mozilla/product-details-json/commit/addeb302c33bda81a0945423f7a331c3de99217f tell me we are good \o/

Yup. Looks good! Thanks! Still need to know how we'll be proceeding with Developer Edition. Should I switch to using the Beta info for DevEd, or will we continue publishing Aurora but referring to the DevEd version?

I wonder if we can use devedition-latest{,-ssl} & devedition-stub from bug 1357378. It will be available later today, when we publish devedition.

We could, but the site (and I assume everything else) already uses aurora-latest.* to mean Developer Edition. Not sure why it needs to change.

I'll let Pascal to chime in. See comment 13 and below. If we want to use aurora-latest, we'll need to change all the things in bug 1357378 + https://dxr.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/source/testing/mozharness/configs/releases/bouncer_firefox_devedition.py

(In reply to Paul [:pmac] McLanahan from comment #13) > Yup. Looks good! Thanks! > > Still need to know how we'll be proceeding with Developer Edition. Should I > switch to using the Beta info for DevEd, or will we continue publishing > Aurora but referring to the DevEd version? Hi Paul, If you are talking about product-details for the product-details django lib, we will no longer update the aurora field in https://product-details.mozilla.org/1.0/firefox_versions.json, it will remain stuck to 54 forever. You should take the value for dev edition from the beta field, the release management team will not update the beta field in product-details until we have both regular betas and dev edition betas built. For the updates needed on Bedrock, Kohei is assigned to update our download pages in Bedrock in bug 1357379 (he was travelling last week but should be back this week and start working on this. If there is anything you think we may have missed regarding the Dawn transition and websites, don't hesitate to ping me on IRC/email.

Thanks Pascal. I was just afraid that this was coming and that we'd not be ready, especially when I noticed that the dev edition product-details had been broken. Glad it was just a hiccup. I'll follow Kohei's bug for updates.

Anything left to do here?

I think this can be closed now.