release: 7.73.1#29107
Merged
Merged
Conversation
Contributor
|
CLA Signature Action: All authors have signed the CLA. You may need to manually re-run the blocking PR check if it doesn't pass in a few minutes. |
|
All alerts resolved. Learn more about Socket for GitHub. This PR previously contained dependency changes with security issues that have been resolved, removed, or ignored. |
<!-- Please submit this PR as a draft initially. Do not mark it as "Ready for review" until this PR meets the canonical Definition of Ready For Review in `docs/readme/ready-for-review.md`. In short: the template must be materially complete (not just section titles present), all status checks must be currently passing, and the only expected follow-up commits must be reviewer-driven. --> ## **Description** Cherry pick: #29151 <!-- Write a short description of the changes included in this pull request, also include relevant motivation and context. Have in mind the following questions: 1. What is the reason for the change? 2. What is the improvement/solution? --> ## **Changelog** <!-- If this PR is not End-User-Facing and should not show up in the CHANGELOG, you can choose to either: 1. Write `CHANGELOG entry: null` 2. Label with `no-changelog` If this PR is End-User-Facing, please write a short User-Facing description in the past tense like: `CHANGELOG entry: Added a new tab for users to see their NFTs` `CHANGELOG entry: Fixed a bug that was causing some NFTs to flicker` (This helps the Release Engineer do their job more quickly and accurately) --> CHANGELOG entry: ## **Related issues** Fixes: ## **Manual testing steps** ```gherkin Feature: my feature name Scenario: user [verb for user action] Given [describe expected initial app state] When user [verb for user action] Then [describe expected outcome] ``` ## **Screenshots/Recordings** <!-- If applicable, add screenshots and/or recordings to visualize the before and after of your change. --> ### **Before** <!-- [screenshots/recordings] --> ### **After** <!-- [screenshots/recordings] --> ## **Pre-merge author checklist** <!-- Every checklist item must be consciously assessed before marking this PR as "Ready for review". A checked box means you deliberately considered that responsibility, not that you literally performed every action listed. Unchecked boxes are ambiguous: they are not an implicit "N/A" and they are not a silent "skip". See `docs/readme/ready-for-review.md` for the full checklist semantics. --> - [ ] I've followed [MetaMask Contributor Docs](https://github.com/MetaMask/contributor-docs) and [MetaMask Mobile Coding Standards](https://github.com/MetaMask/metamask-mobile/blob/main/.github/guidelines/CODING_GUIDELINES.md). - [ ] I've completed the PR template to the best of my ability - [ ] I've included tests if applicable - [ ] I've documented my code using [JSDoc](https://jsdoc.app/) format if applicable - [ ] I've applied the right labels on the PR (see [labeling guidelines](https://github.com/MetaMask/metamask-mobile/blob/main/.github/guidelines/LABELING_GUIDELINES.md)). Not required for external contributors. #### Performance checks (if applicable) - [ ] I've tested on Android - Ideally on a mid-range device; emulator is acceptable - [ ] I've tested with a power user scenario - Use these [power-user SRPs](https://consensyssoftware.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/TL1/pages/edit-v2/401401446401?draftShareId=9d77e1e1-4bdc-4be1-9ebb-ccd916988d93) to import wallets with many accounts and tokens - [ ] I've instrumented key operations with Sentry traces for production performance metrics - See [`trace()`](/app/util/trace.ts) for usage and [`addToken`](/app/components/Views/AddAsset/components/AddCustomToken/AddCustomToken.tsx#L274) for an example For performance guidelines and tooling, see the [Performance Guide](https://consensyssoftware.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/TL1/pages/400085549067/Performance+Guide+for+Engineers). ## **Pre-merge reviewer checklist** <!-- Reviewer checklist items follow the same semantics as the author checklist: an unchecked box is ambiguous, a checked box means the reviewer consciously assessed that responsibility. See `docs/readme/ready-for-review.md`. --> - [ ] I've manually tested the PR (e.g. pull and build branch, run the app, test code being changed). - [ ] I confirm that this PR addresses all acceptance criteria described in the ticket it closes and includes the necessary testing evidence such as recordings and or screenshots. <!-- CURSOR_SUMMARY --> --- > [!NOTE] > **Medium Risk** > Touches CI secret injection and env-var remapping used during builds; a mistake could break build pipelines or alter expected secret values, though changes are limited to trimming surrounding whitespace and adding validation. > > **Overview** > Build workflows now **defensively strip leading/trailing whitespace from CI secrets** before exporting them to the build environment, and warn when trimming occurs. > > GitHub Actions builds additionally **fail fast if any mapped env var still contains surrounding whitespace** via a new `scripts/check-env-whitespace.js` step after `set-secrets-from-config.js`, reducing the chance of shipping binaries with broken OAuth/API keys caused by trailing newlines. > > <sup>Reviewed by [Cursor Bugbot](https://cursor.com/bugbot) for commit 216761d. Bugbot is set up for automated code reviews on this repo. Configure [here](https://www.cursor.com/dashboard/bugbot).</sup> <!-- /CURSOR_SUMMARY -->
…lure (#29222) <!-- Please submit this PR as a draft initially. Do not mark it as "Ready for review" until this PR meets the canonical Definition of Ready For Review in `docs/readme/ready-for-review.md`. In short: the template must be materially complete (not just section titles present), all status checks must be currently passing, and the only expected follow-up commits must be reviewer-driven. --> ## **Description** <!-- Write a short description of the changes included in this pull request, also include relevant motivation and context. Have in mind the following questions: 1. What is the reason for the change? 2. What is the improvement/solution? --> uuid version update in progress https://consensyssoftware.atlassian.net/browse/MCWP-557 ## **Changelog** <!-- If this PR is not End-User-Facing and should not show up in the CHANGELOG, you can choose to either: 1. Write `CHANGELOG entry: null` 2. Label with `no-changelog` If this PR is End-User-Facing, please write a short User-Facing description in the past tense like: `CHANGELOG entry: Added a new tab for users to see their NFTs` `CHANGELOG entry: Fixed a bug that was causing some NFTs to flicker` (This helps the Release Engineer do their job more quickly and accurately) --> CHANGELOG entry: null ## **Related issues** Fixes: https://consensyssoftware.atlassian.net/browse/MCWP-556 ## **Manual testing steps** ```gherkin Feature: my feature name Scenario: user [verb for user action] Given [describe expected initial app state] When user [verb for user action] Then [describe expected outcome] ``` ## **Screenshots/Recordings** <!-- If applicable, add screenshots and/or recordings to visualize the before and after of your change. --> ### **Before** <!-- [screenshots/recordings] --> ### **After** <!-- [screenshots/recordings] --> ## **Pre-merge author checklist** <!-- Every checklist item must be consciously assessed before marking this PR as "Ready for review". A checked box means you deliberately considered that responsibility, not that you literally performed every action listed. Unchecked boxes are ambiguous: they are not an implicit "N/A" and they are not a silent "skip". See `docs/readme/ready-for-review.md` for the full checklist semantics. --> - [x] I've followed [MetaMask Contributor Docs](https://github.com/MetaMask/contributor-docs) and [MetaMask Mobile Coding Standards](https://github.com/MetaMask/metamask-mobile/blob/main/.github/guidelines/CODING_GUIDELINES.md). - [x] I've completed the PR template to the best of my ability - [x] I've included tests if applicable - [x] I've documented my code using [JSDoc](https://jsdoc.app/) format if applicable - [ ] I've applied the right labels on the PR (see [labeling guidelines](https://github.com/MetaMask/metamask-mobile/blob/main/.github/guidelines/LABELING_GUIDELINES.md)). Not required for external contributors. #### Performance checks (if applicable) - [ ] I've tested on Android - Ideally on a mid-range device; emulator is acceptable - [ ] I've tested with a power user scenario - Use these [power-user SRPs](https://consensyssoftware.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/TL1/pages/edit-v2/401401446401?draftShareId=9d77e1e1-4bdc-4be1-9ebb-ccd916988d93) to import wallets with many accounts and tokens - [ ] I've instrumented key operations with Sentry traces for production performance metrics - See [`trace()`](/app/util/trace.ts) for usage and [`addToken`](/app/components/Views/AddAsset/components/AddCustomToken/AddCustomToken.tsx#L274) for an example For performance guidelines and tooling, see the [Performance Guide](https://consensyssoftware.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/TL1/pages/400085549067/Performance+Guide+for+Engineers). ## **Pre-merge reviewer checklist** <!-- Reviewer checklist items follow the same semantics as the author checklist: an unchecked box is ambiguous, a checked box means the reviewer consciously assessed that responsibility. See `docs/readme/ready-for-review.md`. --> - [ ] I've manually tested the PR (e.g. pull and build branch, run the app, test code being changed). - [ ] I confirm that this PR addresses all acceptance criteria described in the ticket it closes and includes the necessary testing evidence such as recordings and or screenshots.
Contributor
🔍 Smart E2E Test Selection⏭️ Smart E2E selection skipped - draft PR All E2E tests pre-selected. |
|
Review the following changes in direct dependencies. Learn more about Socket for GitHub.
|
|
Contributor
|
✅ E2E Fixture Validation — Schema is up to date |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.



🚀 v7.73.1 Testing & Release Quality Process
Hi Team,
As part of our new MetaMask Release Quality Process, here’s a quick overview of the key processes, testing strategies, and milestones to ensure a smooth and high-quality deployment.
📋 Key Processes
Testing Strategy
Conduct regression and exploratory testing for your functional areas, including automated and manual tests for critical workflows.
Focus on exploratory testing across the wallet, prioritize high-impact areas, and triage any Sentry errors found during testing.
Validate new functionalities and provide feedback to support release monitoring.
GitHub Signoff
Issue Resolution
Cherry-Picking Criteria
🗓️ Timeline and Milestones
✅ Signoff Checklist
Each team is responsible for signing off via GitHub. Use the checkbox below to track signoff completion:
Team sign-off checklist
This process is a major step forward in ensuring release stability and quality. Let’s stay aligned and make this release a success! 🚀
Feel free to reach out if you have questions or need clarification.
Many thanks in advance
Reference