Skip to content

Conversation

@gabrielbusta
Copy link
Contributor

No description provided.

Copy link
Contributor

@jcristau jcristau left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

IMO we should check with SRE whether there are currently any differences between archive.mozilla.org and download.cdn.mozilla.net, and/or whether we want to keep the option of splitting them out in the future and thus need to handle release branches specifically here, and if not then get rid of this entirely.

@jcristau
Copy link
Contributor

IMO we should check with SRE whether there are currently any differences between archive.mozilla.org and download.cdn.mozilla.net, and/or whether we want to keep the option of splitting them out in the future and thus need to handle release branches specifically here, and if not then get rid of this entirely.

And actually, even if we do want to replace archive.m.o with download.cdn.m.n still, we might want to make it unconditional: before mozilla-releng/beetmoverscript@d3d932e, only the "date" project branch was skipping it, and that's probably irrelevant nowadays.

@gabrielbusta
Copy link
Contributor Author

I checked with SRE

  • It's the same service. No differences aside from hostname
  • We should only publicize archive.mozilla.org
  • download.cdn.m.n is a implementation detail that is subject to change

Copy link
Contributor

@jcristau jcristau left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Let's get rid of RELEASE_BRANCHES entirely then.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants