Sebastian Kaspari (:sebastian; :pocmo) Reporter
	Description • 7 years ago

The first Android O preview is here!

	Michael Comella (:mcomella) [NI reported issues only: ex-Mozilla]
	Comment 1 • 6 years ago

[triage] Bulk edit from title: this is a non-critical issue or [meta] bug.

	Michael Comella (:mcomella) [NI reported issues only: ex-Mozilla]
	Comment 2 • 6 years ago

[triage] It's critical that we get targetSdk=26 (Oreo) by November. From the Android blog [1]:

> As we announced recently, Google Play will require all app updates to target Android Oreo (targetSdkVersion 26 or higher) by November 2018, with support for 64-bit hardware on the horizon for 2019.

We currently target SDK 23 (according to my config.status).

[1]: https://android-developers.googleblog.com/2018/03/previewing-android-p.html

	:sdaswani
	Comment 3 • 6 years ago

Thanks Mike. Snorp and Nick - do you foresee any issues moving to 26?

	Nick Alexander :nalexander [he/him]
	Comment 4 • 6 years ago

(In reply to :sdaswani from comment #3)
> Thanks Mike. Snorp and Nick - do you foresee any issues moving to 26?

In terms of building, not really -- probably just some routine deprecation work-arounds.  In terms of actually running, yes -- I expect we'll have a lot of subtle bustage, that won't be revealed by what testing we have, and that will take an unknown amount of time to work through.

	:sdaswani
	Comment 5 • 6 years ago

OK understood - I am hoping it's an effort that both the Softvision devs and QA can work through together.

Flagging Andreas and Barbara for prioritization - note the deadline is November, so it could get into 62, or maybe even 63.

	Andreas Bovens [:abovens]
	Comment 6 • 6 years ago

I suggest we aim for 62, so that if there are issues, we can still get them fixed. If we target 63 from the start, there will be little wiggle room in case things don't work out as planned.

	James Willcox (:snorp) (jwillcox@mozilla.com) (he/him)
	Comment 7 • 6 years ago

Yeah, comment #4 captures my thoughts as well.

	:sdaswani
	Comment 8 • 6 years ago

Andrei, this was the bug that I was talking about - if we can move to 26 earlier, then we can more easily use the LP SDK.

	:sdaswani
	Comment 9 • 6 years ago

Vlad, is this something you think you, Petru or Andrei can work on? It requires a lot of moving parts, so maybe not, but just asking.

	Vlad Baicu
	Comment 10 • 6 years ago

Sure, we will asign it to one of us

	Michael Comella (:mcomella) [NI reported issues only: ex-Mozilla]
	Comment 11 • 6 years ago

Vlad, is this something you're tracking for 62? If so, 62 just hit Nightly so I think we should get cracking on it soon: these are usually a lot of work to get working correctly.

	Vlad Baicu
	Comment 12 • 6 years ago

Yes, we are currently working on these with top priority.

	:sdaswani
	Comment 13 • 6 years ago

Yes Mike, these are currently top priority, but I also want to understand what's strictly necessary to accomplish this:

"Google Play will require all app updates to target Android Oreo (targetSdkVersion 26 or higher) by November 2018, with support for 64-bit hardware on the horizon for 2019."

	Jan Henning [:JanH]
	Comment 14 • 6 years ago

Everything listed as blocking bug 1450450 (https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/showdependencytree.cgi?id=1450450&hide_resolved=1) is something where raising the target API to 26 will turn off a compatibility behaviour that we are currently depending on when running on Android N or O.
Since that list was determined only by looking at the documentation, other things might potentially crop up when actually testing things in practice, but it should be mostly complete.

The second half of that sentence means that the currently experimental Aarch64 builds of Gecko need to go into production some time next year, and that'll affect GeckoView, too.

	Firefox Bug Husbandry Bot
	Comment 15 • 6 years ago

Re-triaging per https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1473195

Needinfo :susheel if you think this bug should be re-triaged.

	Ritu Kothari (:ritu) (Inactive, please n-i to RyanVM, jcristau, or pascal)
	Comment 16 • 6 years ago

This is a feature we are tracking for 63 and therefore should be P1 priority. The bulk update perhaps needed to look at the whiteboard tag before updating the priority field. NI Emma, Susheel, Marcia, Pascal as FYI.

	Emma Humphries ☕️🎸🧞‍♀️✨ (she/they) [:emceeaich] (Pacific Time) use needinfo
	Comment 17 • 6 years ago

The query to re-prioritize should had ignored [priority:high] bugs, so I'm not sure what happened. Following up.

	:sdaswani
	Comment 18 • 6 years ago

Clearing NI, doesn't seem necessary any more. Agree this should be a P1.

	:sdaswani
	Comment 19 • 6 years ago

Marcia do you think it's safe to close this now?

	Marcia Knous [:marcia]
	Comment 20 • 6 years ago

(In reply to :sdaswani only needinfo from comment #19)
> Marcia do you think it's safe to close this now?

We usually don't close them out until all the dependent bugs are closed. We should probably work on that and then close this one out.

	BMO Automation
	Comment 22 • 3 years ago

We have completed our launch of our new Firefox on Android. The development of the new versions use GitHub for issue tracking. If the bug report still reproduces in a current version of [Firefox on Android nightly](https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=org.mozilla.fenix) an issue can be reported at the [Fenix GitHub project](https://github.com/mozilla-mobile/fenix/). If you want to discuss your report please use [Mozilla's chat](https://wiki.mozilla.org/Matrix#Connect_to_Matrix) server https://chat.mozilla.org and join the [#fenix](https://chat.mozilla.org/#/room/#fenix:mozilla.org) channel.