-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.9k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Deploy Checklist: Expensify.cash 2021-03-19 #1926
Comments
#1548 cannot be tested because of #1981 (which was a pass) Not sure if it can be checked off @Julesssss or @thienlnam can you guys confirm which is the intended behaviour? |
#2032 (comment) Not sure if deploy blocker. Issue is not reproducible in Android devices. #2010 (comment) - Tested and checked off! Looks like #2086 was not deployed to staging . It was added to the deploy list after the lock label was applied. Not sure if we should check it off (also looks like internal QA) CC @marcaaron |
Hi @isagoico. No need to test #1548, as its test steps were made redundant. |
I've also commented in #2010 with testing steps. (it's listed twice here, was that a duplication, or is there supposed to be a 4th issue in the list?) |
Thank a lot ! there was a link missing indeed and I just duplicated the #2010 🤦 |
This was a bug in the deploy process. So we should proceed without that one for this deploy cycle, and try to remember to retest after our next staging deploy. |
Working with @NikkiWines to determine if #2040 is a true deploy blocker. Looks like that's our last unchecked box. Other PRs are being erroneously added to the list despite not being deployed to staging, but they should be included in the next |
Okay, just a clarification on the process that's happening here: When the As a result, in cases like we had today where there are deploy blockers and we need to remove and re-add the lock label, we won't be able to do staging QA on iOS of the code that was deployed to staging today. So @isagoico that means you can skip iOS staging QA today. We may be able to bypass the Apple review on TestFlight for a small set of people, so hopefully this won't be a problem in the future if we can get you added to that list. |
Summary of today's run: Issues found during regression testing: |
Hello! These PRs seems like internal QA (or just not QAable by applause) |
Hmm it should be testable, but not very obvious so I can test it myself. The two issues are also using more or less the same testing steps. |
Chat Regressions and PRs are finished!
PRs are finished too, no comments added. |
@roryabraham Regression is done! iOS build in TF was the same as yesterday (1.0.7-0) so we holded on executing the regression on that one. Let me know if we should execute either way. |
Nope, for the time being that's the plan! No need to perform regression testing twice on the same app version. |
Regression is finished!
Today's PRs were all a pass 🎉 @Julesssss there's this PR #2110 that I think it's internal QA. Can you confirm? Removing the lock label. |
Hi @isagoico. Yeah that can be tested internally as the test steps are a bit tricky currently. |
Fix for 2175 in review now #2189 |
Regression is finished!
PRs are finished too.
|
Regression is finished!
PRs were a pass! 🎉 |
Regression is finished!
PRs are finished too: |
We have been able to reproduce this issue several times and in different devices during regression 1.0.1-15 https://github.com/Expensify/Expensify/issues/157735. It's not consistently reproducible. |
Regression is finished!
PRs are finished too! #2110 was going to be tested internally CC @Julesssss |
Release Version:
1.0.16-0
Compare Changes: 1.0.15-0...1.0.16-0
This release contains changes from the following pull requests:
Deploy Blockers:
cc @Expensify/applauseleads
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: