Skip to content

build: update firefox to latest version #20014

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

Merged

Conversation

devversion
Copy link
Member

Updates our Firefox version that is used for Bazel unit tests to v78.0.
Previously we were using v68.

To update the Firefox version, we had to set up a custom Browser target
with repositories as the version for Firefox is usually hard-coded in
rules_webtesting and we cannot control that.

See related change in the dev-infra package: angular/angular#38029.
This is an addition to: #19961

@googlebot googlebot added the cla: yes PR author has agreed to Google's Contributor License Agreement label Jul 16, 2020
@devversion devversion added merge safe P2 The issue is important to a large percentage of users, with a workaround target: patch This PR is targeted for the next patch release labels Jul 16, 2020
Updates our Firefox version that is used for Bazel unit tests to v78.0.
Previously we were using v68.

To update the Firefox version, we had to set up a custom Browser target
with repositories as the version for Firefox is usually hard-coded in
`rules_webtesting` and we cannot control that.

See related change in the dev-infra package:
angular/angular#38029.
…ations

A small set of popover-edit tests relies on the bounding client rect.
Assertions that the panel stretches over the first and last cell are
correct but require an exact equality. This is not reliable as in some
situations, browsers handle subpixels differently, resulting in
small deviations in the bounding client rect positions. These
differences are only noticeable less significant decimal places, but
the overall assertion matches full pixels. This is sufficient for these
tests so we just round all measurements/comparisons to full pixels.
@devversion devversion force-pushed the build/update-firefox-test-version branch 7 times, most recently from 5bd2f61 to 8922d45 Compare July 17, 2020 16:18
@devversion devversion marked this pull request as ready for review July 17, 2020 16:33
@devversion devversion requested review from andrewseguin, mmalerba and a team as code owners July 17, 2020 16:33
@@ -564,6 +564,10 @@ matPopoverEditTabOut`, fakeAsync(() => {
});

describe('edit lens', () => {
function expectPixelsToEqual(actual: number, expected: number) {
expect(Math.round(actual)).toBe(Math.round(expected));
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Usually I do Math.floor or Math.ceil for assertions like this, because with round you could get a mismatch for 1.4 vs 1.6.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yeah, that is tricky. I checked and saw lots of Math.round assertions in our code base. We don't seem to do it consistently. One benefit of round will be that we potentially spot one-off issues easier (as the browser potentially will round the pixels depending). I'll switch it to Math.floor.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

done

The datepicker position tests seem to be thrown off in Firefox v78 where
inputs have an uneven width (resulting in subpixel rendering that is not
predictable and stable enough for our test assertions)
@devversion devversion force-pushed the build/update-firefox-test-version branch from 8922d45 to 2753c01 Compare July 17, 2020 19:34
@devversion devversion added the merge: preserve commits When the PR is merged, a rebase and merge should be performed label Jul 17, 2020
Copy link
Member

@jelbourn jelbourn left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

@jelbourn jelbourn added lgtm action: merge The PR is ready for merge by the caretaker labels Jul 17, 2020
@andrewseguin andrewseguin added target: minor This PR is targeted for the next minor release and removed target: patch This PR is targeted for the next patch release labels Jul 17, 2020
@andrewseguin andrewseguin merged commit 57f20bf into angular:master Jul 17, 2020
@angular-automatic-lock-bot
Copy link

This issue has been automatically locked due to inactivity.
Please file a new issue if you are encountering a similar or related problem.

Read more about our automatic conversation locking policy.

This action has been performed automatically by a bot.

@angular-automatic-lock-bot angular-automatic-lock-bot bot locked and limited conversation to collaborators Aug 17, 2020
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
action: merge The PR is ready for merge by the caretaker cla: yes PR author has agreed to Google's Contributor License Agreement merge: preserve commits When the PR is merged, a rebase and merge should be performed P2 The issue is important to a large percentage of users, with a workaround target: minor This PR is targeted for the next minor release
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants