On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 4:57 PM, Emma Humphries <e...@mozilla.com> wrote:

> Hello,
>
> We control enabling many features and changes to Firefox using preferences.
>
> Program and Release management as well as PI need a better view of this.
>
> We've written a new policy which you can read on our nascent bug-handling
> mini-site:
>
> https://github.com/mozilla/bug-handling/blob/master/
> policy/feature-flags.md
>
> To summarize, when you are releasing a feature that "rides behind a flag",
> on the bug for the feature:
>
> * set the behind-pref flag to +
> * set the qa-verify flag to ?
> * note the bug in the Firefox Feature Trello board
>
> We expect qa-verify to be set to + before enabling prefs on features.
>
> We'll be going over this at two upcoming meetings, with Reese's and JoeH's
> teams.
>
> There are two, known open questions to resolve on the policy:
>
> * Features developed over multiple releases with individual patches not
> verifiable by external testing (passing unit tests, but not integration
> tests) such as Hello and WebRTC
> * Features are often turned on in Nightly, ignoring prefs using compiler
> directives, and kept off in Beta and Release. Is this the right thing to
> do, or should we be flipping prefs from on to off when going from Nightly
> to Beta and forwards?
>

Not all features are feasible to ship behind feature flags.  Fennec
features that interact with the OS directly, in particular, can sometimes
just be all or nothing; and I would anticipate that things that interact
directly with newer App stores (iOS features, say, or Windows Store
features in the future) will become more common.  We can't have a policy
that fights against that trend.

Nick
_______________________________________________
dev-platform mailing list
dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform

Reply via email to