----- Original Message ----- > From: "Mike Hommey" <m...@glandium.org> > To: "John O'Duinn" <jodu...@mozilla.com> > Cc: "dev. planning" <dev-plann...@lists.mozilla.org>, > dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org, "release" <rele...@mozilla.com> > Sent: Friday, November 22, 2013 1:34:46 AM > Subject: Re: Proposed changes to RelEng's OSX build and test infrastructure > > On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 04:56:50PM -0500, John O'Duinn wrote: > > 6) If a developer lands a patch that works on 10.9, but it fails somehow > > on 10.7 or 10.8, it is unlikely that we would back out the fix, and we > > would instead tell users to upgrade to 10.9 anyways, for the security > > fixes. > > It's not because we tell users to do so that they will. Chances are they > will choose another browser that works on their OS than upgrade it. I do > know a few people that don't like the new things in 10.8 and are keeping > 10.7 on purpose. > > How much effort would it be to image the test machines such that they > can boot multiple versions of OSX, and have them reboot under 10.7 and > 10.8 instead of 10.6 and 10.9 when demand is low, and run tests on those > platforms? > We have thought of this in the past, however, we have always been getting higher up goals. We would have to consult with RelOps (IT's supporting branch for Releng) and it would require some re-work on the imaging systems. In fact, we're currently working on switching from our current system, DeployStudio, to casper.
On the scheduling side it will require a decent amount of re-factoring. This would have to be added to our planned re-writing of our scheduling system. This would still have to deal with not getting immediate feedback for commits on 10.7 and 10.8 and how to deal with backouts and regression hunting. > Mike > _______________________________________________ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
