Schedule Driven Releases: Channel Strategy

Ehsan Akhgari ehsan at
Thu Apr 21 17:07:14 UTC 2011

On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 11:57 AM, Blake Winton <bwinton at> wrote:

> On 11-04-21 8:47 , Robert Kaiser wrote:
>> Mark Banner schrieb:
>>  With this mapping, we'll also definitely need the Canary system
>>> completing for the trunk builds.
>> Actually, I'd think that with this, you don't need the Canary system at
>> all, as anyone concerned with stability in the slightest sense will use
>> aurora-based builds and trunk should build against mozilla-central
>> proper exactly to find any compile, etc. problems as fast as possible,
>> while a Canary-style system papers over that and invites to not fixing
>> problems.
> As someone trying to write and review patches for Thunderbird, I want to be
> able to compile and run the code.  Since it will be landing on trunk, I'm
> forced to use trunk to do this.  If m-c breaks c-c, as has happened in the
> past, I don't want to have to waste my time (and the time of everyone else
> in my situation) tracking down and fixing things.
> I believe in our ability to make the Canary system annoying enough to the
> right people when things break that we will fix them as quickly as we are
> able to, while still letting people who have other stuff to do to continue
> doing it.  (Heck, we could send SMS messages every 15 minutes until trunk
> compiles and passes the tests, if it comes to that. ;)

I may be in sort of a special spot, but I'd like Thunderbird's main
development tree to stay on mozilla-central.  Here's my argument.

We make a number of changes in some of the areas that is closely related to
Thunderbird on trunk (yes, I'm mostly talking about editor).  While the
people writing those changes might have the best of intentions, they may
break Thunderbird in unexpected ways.  I mean, they break Firefox itself in
unexpected ways.  (Again, yes, "they" here is mostly referring to me.)
Fixing stuff on Aurora is going to be hard, because drivers will push to
keep the amount of changes on Aurora to a minimum.  So, it's in everybody's
best interests for those bugs to surface as soon as possible, ideally before
we merge to Aurora.

If Thunderbird's main development line stays on Aurora, then I don't know
what would happen to those regressions, especially since that under the
current mozilla-central policies, I _think_ that a backout will not be
accepted for a regression on Aurora which would only affect Thunderbird, and
not Firefox.  :(

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the tb-planning mailing list