Provide preferences for bug fixes: 1563695, 1556491, 1562315
Categories
(Core :: Networking: HTTP, task, P1)
Tracking
()
People
(Reporter: mayhemer, Assigned: mayhemer)
References
(Blocks 1 open bug)
Details
(Whiteboard: [necko-triaged][secure-proxy-mvp])
Attachments
(1 file)
(deleted),
text/x-phabricator-request
|
jcristau
:
approval-mozilla-beta+
jcristau
:
approval-mozilla-release+
jcristau
:
approval-mozilla-esr68+
|
Details |
Assignee | ||
Updated•5 years ago
|
Assignee | ||
Comment 1•5 years ago
|
||
Assignee | ||
Comment 2•5 years ago
|
||
builds, off of Nightly (m-c):
https://treeherder.mozilla.org/#/jobs?repo=try&revision=1dc070b0a98a2e174ddfb3b847ae0d25b5944253
Assignee | ||
Comment 3•5 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 9077649 [details]
Bug 1565518, emergency preferences to turn off individual bug fixes: 1563695, 1556491, 1562315, r=kershaw!
Beta/Release Uplift Approval Request
- User impact if declined: Gives us a possibility to flip off individual changes (restore previous state) we want to uplift to release in case of major problems found during dogfooding/field testing/release.
- Is this code covered by automated tests?: No
- Has the fix been verified in Nightly?: Yes
- Needs manual test from QE?: No
- If yes, steps to reproduce: There are currently 4 bool preferences, giving combo of 16 possible configurations. Doing testing of all of them is excessive and not necessary.
Local testing on each of the pref was made.
- List of other uplifts needed: Bug 1563695, Bug 1556491, Bug 1562315
- Risk to taking this patch: Low
- Why is the change risky/not risky? (and alternatives if risky): Extremely low risk, this is nothing more then branching of code the way as it was before each individual patch based on a pref flip (read of atomic bool values). Note that this copies the pattern from bug 1563538, which is on Nightly/Beta since Jul 7.
- String changes made/needed: none
Assignee | ||
Comment 4•5 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 9077649 [details]
Bug 1565518, emergency preferences to turn off individual bug fixes: 1563695, 1556491, 1562315, r=kershaw!
Beta/Release Uplift Approval Request
see comment 3
Assignee | ||
Comment 6•5 years ago
|
||
Builds of off current mozilla-release:
https://treeherder.mozilla.org/#/jobs?repo=try&revision=95268ddd3e04fc5d7259fd38b9d1db1b00f0f9f0
Comment 7•5 years ago
|
||
bugherder |
Comment 8•5 years ago
|
||
Tested with the prefs on by default, found no issues. Turned prefs off and tested without secure proxy and found no issues. Marking as verified.
Comment 9•5 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 9077649 [details]
Bug 1565518, emergency preferences to turn off individual bug fixes: 1563695, 1556491, 1562315, r=kershaw!
prefs for http2 proxying fixes, approved for 69.0b7 / 68.0.1 / 68.1esr
Comment 10•5 years ago
|
||
bugherder uplift |
Comment 11•5 years ago
|
||
Change the status for beta to have the same as nightly and release.
For more information, please visit auto_nag documentation.
Comment 12•5 years ago
|
||
Per discussion with jcristau, we're uplifting this to 68.0.1esr also to maintain parity with the non-ESR 68.0.1 release and hopefully avoid some confusion.
Comment 13•5 years ago
|
||
uplift |
default (68.1esr): https://hg.mozilla.org/releases/mozilla-esr68/rev/399e7261f098dbac19bdd10fadfcc869c970bb87
FIREFOX_ESR_68_0_X_RELBRANCH (68.0.1esr): https://hg.mozilla.org/releases/mozilla-esr68/rev/3c4fda3c06ecf69a3a9e3cd48d58a164c650980c
Do we need a bug for removing these prefs eventually?
Comment 14•5 years ago
|
||
ni Honza for the question in comment 13:
(In reply to Ryan VanderMeulen [:RyanVM] from comment #13)
Do we need a bug for removing these prefs eventually?
Assignee | ||
Comment 15•5 years ago
|
||
Yes, I will file one, but I'm not sure about a release to land it yet. I think we may need these, just in case, for a while. There is no big harm.
Description
•