Skip to content

Deploy Checklist: New Expensify 2024-02-26 #37224

Closed

Description

@github-actions

Release Version: 1.4.44-13
Compare Changes: production...staging

This release contains changes from the following pull requests:

Internal QA:

Deploy Blockers:

Deployer verifications:

  • I checked the App Timing Dashboard and verified this release does not cause a noticeable performance regression.
  • I checked Firebase Crashlytics and verified that this release does not introduce any new crashes. More detailed instructions on this verification can be found here.
  • I checked GitHub Status and verified there is no reported incident with Actions.

cc @Expensify/applauseleads

Activity

  1. self-assigned this
    on Feb 26, 2024
  2. OSBotify commented on Feb 26, 2024

    @OSBotify
    Contributor

    🚀 All staging deploys are complete, @Expensify/applauseleads please begin QA on version https://github.com/Expensify/App/releases/tag/1.4.44-0 🚀

  3. luacmartins commented on Feb 26, 2024

    @luacmartins
    Contributor

    Checking off #37235. Dupe of #37109

  4. roryabraham commented on Feb 26, 2024

    @roryabraham
    Contributor

    Demoted #37239

  5. youssef-lr commented on Feb 27, 2024

    @youssef-lr
    Contributor

    Checking off #37248, I can reproduce in production.

  6. techievivek commented on Feb 27, 2024

    @techievivek
    Contributor

    #37253 is resolved.

  7. Julesssss commented on Feb 27, 2024

    @Julesssss
    Contributor

    I checked off #36807 from the internal QA list 🎉

  8. melvin-bot commented on Feb 27, 2024

    @melvin-bot
  9. Julesssss commented on Feb 27, 2024

    @Julesssss
    Contributor

    I'm not sure who checked off #37291, but it is definately not a blocker

  10. melvin-bot commented on Feb 27, 2024

    @melvin-bot

    ⚠️ Looks like this issue was linked to a Deploy Blocker here

    If you are the assigned CME please investigate whether the linked PR caused a regression and leave a comment with the results.

    If a regression has occurred and you are the assigned CM follow the instructions here.

    If this regression could have been avoided please consider also proposing a recommendation to the PR checklist so that we can avoid it in the future.

  11. kavimuru commented on Feb 27, 2024

    @kavimuru

    Regression is 7% left. We are still working on the PRs.

    #34409 is failing in mweb with #37276 and repro in PROD, checking if off
    #35065 failing with #37252 in android
    #35451 is failing with known bug #32699.checking it off. Please see comment #35451 (comment)

  12. rlinoz commented on Feb 27, 2024

    @rlinoz
    Contributor

    Demoted #37279

  13. 3 remaining items

  14. chiragsalian commented on Feb 27, 2024

    @chiragsalian
    Contributor

    QA team, we CP-d this PR #37305. Since its a revert there is nothing to to test directly with that PR.
    Instead can you retest its linked issues, they are all deploy blockers and if the issue is resolved please clear the deploy blocker labels,
    #37257
    #37252
    #37273
    #37156
    #37325

  15. kavimuru commented on Feb 27, 2024

    @kavimuru

    @chiragsalian Sure we will retest and remove the blocker labels.

  16. melvin-bot commented on Feb 27, 2024

    @melvin-bot

    ⚠️ Looks like this issue was linked to a Deploy Blocker here

    If you are the assigned CME please investigate whether the linked PR caused a regression and leave a comment with the results.

    If a regression has occurred and you are the assigned CM follow the instructions here.

    If this regression could have been avoided please consider also proposing a recommendation to the PR checklist so that we can avoid it in the future.

  17. kavimuru commented on Feb 27, 2024

    @kavimuru

    Regression is left with 5 steps. We are still validating the PRs.

    Unchecked PRs:
    #35065 failing with #37252 in android
    #36773 failing with #37229
    #37009 failing with #37247
    @puneetlath
    QA team does not have physical card to validate this PR #34716 (comment) - It would be great if you could verify this internally.

    I think the following PRs does not require QA. Could you confirm?
    #36321 (comment)
    #36323 (comment)
    #36466 (comment)

  18. puneetlath commented on Feb 27, 2024

    @puneetlath
    Contributor

    I think the following PRs does not require QA. Could you confirm?

    Confirmed.

  19. kavimuru commented on Feb 27, 2024

    @kavimuru

    @chiragsalian

    QA team, we CP-d this PR #37305. Since its a revert there is nothing to to test directly with that PR.
    Instead can you retest its linked issues, they are all deploy blockers and if the issue is resolved please clear the deploy blocker labels,
    #37257
    #37252
    #37273
    #37156
    #37325

    All the bugs are not repro anymore. Removing deployblocker label.

  20. kavimuru commented on Feb 28, 2024

    @kavimuru

    Regression TR completed. We have few PR and CPs are yet to be validated.

    #35065 failing with #37252 in android
    #35451 is failing with known bug #32699.checking it off. Please see comment #35451 (comment)
    #36773 failing with #37229
    #36759 and #37009 failing with # 37247
    #35319 failing with known bug #27866 in mweb. checking it off. see comment #35319 (comment)
    #36345 failing with #37363

  21. Julesssss commented on Feb 28, 2024

    @Julesssss
    Contributor

    Checking off #37403 as it isn't a blocker.

  22. kavimuru commented on Feb 28, 2024

    @kavimuru

    #35065 failing with #37252 in android
    #36773 failing with #37229
    #36759 and #37009 failing with # 37247
    #36345 failing with #37363
    #36993 failing with #37338
    #35449 failing with #37405 repro in PROD checking it off
    #36784 failing with #37414
    #36848 failing with #37434 repro in PROD checking it off

  23. puneetlath commented on Feb 28, 2024

    @puneetlath
    Contributor

    Checking off #36345. It'll be fixed as a follow-up not blocking the deploy.

  24. puneetlath commented on Feb 28, 2024

    @puneetlath
    Contributor

    Checking off #37408 since it's likely a back-end thing.

  25. puneetlath commented on Feb 28, 2024

    @puneetlath
    Contributor

    Marking #37417 as not a blocker.

  26. puneetlath commented on Feb 28, 2024

    @puneetlath
    Contributor

    Decided #37271 is not a blocker here.

  27. puneetlath commented on Feb 28, 2024

    @puneetlath
    Contributor

    :shipit:

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

Metadata

Metadata

Type

No type

Projects

No projects

    Milestone

    No milestone

    Relationships

    None yet

    Development

    No branches or pull requests

    Issue actions