diff options
author | Daniel Baumann <daniel.baumann@progress-linux.org> | 2024-04-07 19:33:14 +0000 |
---|---|---|
committer | Daniel Baumann <daniel.baumann@progress-linux.org> | 2024-04-07 19:33:14 +0000 |
commit | 36d22d82aa202bb199967e9512281e9a53db42c9 (patch) | |
tree | 105e8c98ddea1c1e4784a60a5a6410fa416be2de /mobile/android/docs/geckoview/design/breaking-changes.rst | |
parent | Initial commit. (diff) | |
download | firefox-esr-36d22d82aa202bb199967e9512281e9a53db42c9.tar.xz firefox-esr-36d22d82aa202bb199967e9512281e9a53db42c9.zip |
Adding upstream version 115.7.0esr.upstream/115.7.0esrupstream
Signed-off-by: Daniel Baumann <daniel.baumann@progress-linux.org>
Diffstat (limited to 'mobile/android/docs/geckoview/design/breaking-changes.rst')
-rw-r--r-- | mobile/android/docs/geckoview/design/breaking-changes.rst | 232 |
1 files changed, 232 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/mobile/android/docs/geckoview/design/breaking-changes.rst b/mobile/android/docs/geckoview/design/breaking-changes.rst new file mode 100644 index 0000000000..8838a225fa --- /dev/null +++ b/mobile/android/docs/geckoview/design/breaking-changes.rst @@ -0,0 +1,232 @@ +Breaking changes in GeckoView +============================= + +Agi sferro <agi@sferro.dev> + +Abstract +-------- + +This document describes the reasoning behind the GeckoView deprecation policy, +where we are today and where we want to be in the future. + +Background +---------- + +The following sections illustrate how breaking changes are expensive and +frustrating as a consumer of GeckoView, as a Gecko engineer and as an external +consumer, how they take away time from the Fenix team and reduce the average +testing time on Nightly up to 30%. And finally, how breaking changes negate the +very advantages that brought us to the current modularized architecture. + +Introduction +------------ + +GeckoView is a library that provides consumers access to Gecko and is the main +way through which Gecko is consumed on Mozilla’s Android products. + +GeckoView provides Nightly, Beta and Release channels which update with the +same cadence as Firefox Desktop does. + +Firefox for Android (code name Fenix) is developed on a standalone repository +on GitHub and uses GeckoView through Android Components (AC for short), an +Android library also developed on its own standalone repository. + +Fenix also provides Nightly, Beta and Release updates that mirror GeckoView and +Firefox Desktop’s. + +Testing days +------------ + +All Firefox Gecko-based products release a new major version every 4 weeks. +Which means that, on average, a commit that lands on a random day during the +release cycle gets 2 weeks of testing time on the Nightly user base. + +We try to increase the average testing time on Nightly by having a few “soft” +code-freeze days before each Merge day where engineers are not supposed to push +risky changes, but there’s no enforcement and it’s left to each engineer to +decide whether their change is risky or not. + +Each day where the Nightly build is delayed, every change contained in the +current Nightly cycle gets 7% (1 out of 14 days) on average less testing that +it normally would during a build. That is assuming that a problem gets +immediately reported and the report is immediately referred to the right +Engineering team. + +Assuming a 4 days report delay, each day where the Nightly build is delayed, +due to reasons such as breaking changes, reduces the average testing time by +10%. + +Nightly update +-------------- + +Fenix Nightly consumes GeckoView indirectly through Android Components. Each +day, an automated script makes a change in Fenix’s codebase to update AC’s +version. This change is then submitted to Fenix’s CI and, if all tests pass, is +merged to the codebase automatically. + +A new Fenix Nightly build is then generated and automatically published to +Google’s Play Store, from where it gets distributed to all Nightly users on +Android. + +Android Components has a similar automated process which publishes new versions +every day, picking up the new GeckoView nightly build. + +The update process fails from time to time. The cause of the failure largely +falls in one of the following three buckets. + +- An intermittent test failure +- A bug introduced in the latest AC or GeckoView update which causes a test to + fail +- A backward incompatible change has been made in AC or GeckoView that breaks + the build. + +The current mitigation for 1 is to disable or fix tests that fail +intermittently, similarly to what happens in mozilla-central. + +2 and 3 are problems unique to Fenix and AC (as compared to Firefox Desktop) +and are a direct consequence of the multi-package infrastructure of Fenix. + +Build breakages +--------------- + +When the automated Nightly update fails, an engineer on the Fenix team needs to +manually intervene to unblock the build. + +The need for a manual intervention automatically adds a day of Nightly build +delay when the failure occurs outside of business hours, and 2 or 3 days of +delay when the failure happens on a Friday night. + +Therefore, even assuming that a build breakage takes no time to fix, the +average testing time is reduced by 7-30% for each build breakage that occurs. + +In the case where the breakage takes a few days or more to fix, the average +testing time can be reduced to as much as half of what it would be on a +breakage-free Nightly cycle. + +Build breakages put undue burden on the Fenix team, who has to jump on the +breakage and has to drop their current work to avoid losing additional testing +days. + +Reducing breakages +------------------ + +Breakages caused by upstream teams like GeckoView can be divided into 2 groups: + +- Behavior changes that cause test failures downstream +- Breaking changes in the API that cause the build to fail. + +To reduce breakages from group 1, the GeckoView team maintains an extensive set +of integration tests that operate solely on the GeckoView API, and therefore +rarely break because of refactoring. + +For group 2, the GeckoView team instituted a deprecation policy which requires +each backward-incompatible change to keep the old code for 3 releases, allowing +downstream consumers, like Fenix, time to migrate asynchronously to the new +code without breaking the build. + +Functional testing and prototyping +---------------------------------- + +GeckoView offers a test browser app called GeckoViewExample (or GVE) that is +developed in-tree and thus always available to test local changes. + +GVE is the main testing vehicle for Gecko and GeckoView engineers that want to +develop new code, however, there frequently are issues or new features that +cannot be tested on GVE and need to be tested directly on Fenix. + +To test new code in Fenix, the build system offers an easy way to swap +locally-build GeckoView in Fenix. + +The process of testing new Gecko code in Fenix needs to be straightforward, as +it’s often used by platform engineers that are unfamiliar with Android and +Fenix itself, and are not likely to retain knowledge from running code on +Android and would likely need help to do so from the GeckoView or Fenix team. + +Side-effects of build breakages +------------------------------- + +When a breakage lands in mozilla-central and until the breakage is fixed in the +Fenix codebase, a locally built GeckoView is not compatible with the +most-recent tip of Fenix. + +This can be confusing to an engineer that is unfamiliar to Fenix, and can cause +frustration and time lost trying to figure out why upstream code, without +modifications, fails to compile. + +Beyond confusion, an incompatibility on the GeckoView/Fenix combined history +negates the primary advantage of building Fenix in a separate package: +decoupling Gecko from the Android front-end. + +Building older versions from source is also harder, as the set of version +couples (GeckoView, Fenix) that are compatible with each other is not +explicitly documented anywhere. + +External consumers +------------------ + +For apps interested in building a browser for Android, GeckoView provides the +unique combination of being a modern Web engine with a relatively stable API. + +For comparison, alternatives to GeckoView include: + +- WebView, Android’s way of embedding web pages on Android apps. WebView has + has several drawbacks for browser developers, including: + + - having a limited API for building browsers, as it does not expose modern + Web features or browser-specific APIs like bookmarks, passwords, etc; + - not allowing developers to control the underlying Chromium version. WebView + users will get whatever version of WebView is installed on the device. + - On the other hand, using WebView has the advantage of providing a smaller + download package, as the bulk of the engine is already installed on the + device. + +- Fork Chromium, which has the drawback of either having to rewrite the entire + browser front-end or locally patching the Chrome front-end, which involves + frequent changes and updates to be on top of. Using Chromium has the advantage + of providing the most stable, performant and compatible Web Engine on the + market. + +If the cost of updating GeckoView becomes high enough because of frequent API +changes, the advantage of using GeckoView is negated. + +Prior Art +--------- + +Many public libraries offer a deprecation policy similar or better than +GeckoView. For example, Android APIs need to be deprecated for a few releases +before being considered for removal, and completely removed only in exceptional +cases. Google products’ deprecated APIs are supported for a year before being +removed. Ebay requires deprecating an API before removal. + +Status quo +---------- + +Making backward-incompatible changes to the GeckoView API is currently heavily +discouraged and requires approval by the GeckoView team. + +We do, however, have breaking changes from time to time. The last breaking +change was in June 2021, a refactor of the permission API which we didn’t think +was worth executing in a backward compatible way. Before that, the last +breaking change was in September 2020. + +Tracking breaking changes +------------------------- + +Internally, GeckoView tracks the API using apilint. Each change that touches +the API requires an additional GeckoView peer to review the patch and a +description of the change in the changelog. + +Apilint also tracks deprecated APIs and enforces their removal, so that old, +deprecated APIs don’t linger in the codebase for longer than necessary. + +The future +---------- + +The ideal end state for GeckoView would be to not have any more backward +incompatible changes. Our experience is that supporting the old APIs for a +limited time is a small overhead in our development and that the benefits from +having a backward compatible API greatly outweigh the cost. + +We cannot, however, predict all future needs of GeckoView and Firefox as a +whole, so we cannot exclude the possibility of having new breaking changes +going forward. |