doc: How to create new release branch CI files #1247
Conversation
openshift-ci
bot
added
the
do-not-merge/work-in-progress
|
Skipping CI for Draft Pull Request. |
|
Issues go stale after 90d of inactivity. Mark the issue as fresh by commenting If this issue is safe to close now please do so with /lifecycle stale |
openshift-ci
bot
added
the
lifecycle/stale
This comment was marked as resolved.
This comment was marked as resolved.
openshift-ci
bot
removed
the
lifecycle/stale
mateusoliveira43
force-pushed
the
doc/ci-new-branch
branch
from
29ffc65 to
c65910e
Compare
openshift-ci
bot
added
the
approved
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
openshift-ci
bot
added
do-not-merge/hold
openshift-ci
bot
added
the
do-not-merge/work-in-progress
mateusoliveira43
force-pushed
the
doc/ci-new-branch
branch
from
95242e4 to
32fe690
Compare
openshift-ci
bot
removed
the
do-not-merge/work-in-progress
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
openshift-ci
bot
removed
the
do-not-merge/hold
| @@ -0,0 +1,10 @@ | |||
| # This Dockerfile WILL used by PROW CI to run E2E tests of the repo | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
uhum
after merge I will open a CI PR (in openshift/release) to CI to use this new dockerfile; and then, another PR to remove build/ folder from here, to fix #1259
Signed-off-by: Mateus Oliveira <msouzaol@redhat.com>
|
@mateusoliveira43: Overrode contexts on behalf of mateusoliveira43: ci/prow/4.15-e2e-test-aws In response to this:
Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository. |
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
|
@mateusoliveira43: Overrode contexts on behalf of mateusoliveira43: ci/prow/4.16-e2e-test-aws In response to this:
Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository. |
|
|
||
| https://github.com/openshift/oadp-operator/issues/1227 | ||
| To create new OADP release branches (they must follow the pattern `oadp-major.minor`, [example](https://github.com/openshift/oadp-operator/tree/oadp-1.4)): | ||
| - First, create CI files for each new repository branch. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What CI Files? Is there a link or information what theCI files are ?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yes, in this same file, there are links to each OADP repo CI files
example https://github.com/openshift/oadp-operator/blob/master/docs/developer/PROW_CI.md?plain=1#L5-L8
| https://github.com/openshift/oadp-operator/issues/1227 | ||
| To create new OADP release branches (they must follow the pattern `oadp-major.minor`, [example](https://github.com/openshift/oadp-operator/tree/oadp-1.4)): | ||
| - First, create CI files for each new repository branch. | ||
| - Create the release branches in each one of related repositories of OADP, and OADP operator repository itself. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Do we have a clear list of those repositories? Maybe a link so no repo is forgotten?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yes, in this same file, at the top
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Since it's *.md make it a link?
| - First, create CI files for each new repository branch. | ||
| - Create the release branches in each one of related repositories of OADP, and OADP operator repository itself. | ||
| - The new release branches must be updated: | ||
| - Downstream repositories release branches may not need updates (except OADP operator, which always need updates). |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
- Downstream OADP operator always requires updates.
- Other downstream repositories and their release branches generally do not need updates.
- Write when they may require updates
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I do not know if there is a clear when
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Any suggestions? This can't be made based on judgement, rather some agreement when it's needed so someone who makes new branch knows at least what to look for. I think it's something to be discussed on scrum.
| - Downstream repositories release branches may not need updates (except OADP operator, which always need updates). | ||
| - Upstream repositories release branches need to be rebased. | ||
|
|
||
| > **Note**: Try to always create release branches from default branches (usually called master). |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Could we have a little help here:
The default branch of a given repository can be checked using the following command
$ curl -s https://api.github.com/repos/openshift/oadp-operator | jq -r .default_branch
masterThere was a problem hiding this comment.
this can be checked through UI, do not think we need this
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It can be checked in many way of course. But with new branch you usually use shell or UI? either one works if it's the one to continue. I believe we don't want the user to switch between UI and shell, rather have set of instructions within one.
|
|
||
| > **Note**: Try to always create release branches from default branches (usually called master). | ||
|
|
||
| > **Note**: Documentation should live only in default branches. For example, for OADP operator, `docs/` and `blogs/` folders can be deleted in release branches. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
can or should be deleted? Leaving option to leave it would be softer then explicitly stating that we only want the default branch to be updated with docs. Does the default branch carries over old design documentation, or proper instructions for a given branch? What if the instructions are changing in master branch? Do we keep the correct ones for a given branch?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
we currently do not delete, I want to start doing this
we have old docs in master yes, like this https://github.com/openshift/oadp-operator/blob/master/docs/upgrade_1-1_to_1-2.md
There was a problem hiding this comment.
So I would make this document clear that we do delete and then continue with implementation (deletion). Note, this won't affect rebases and cherry-picks?
| ... | ||
| ``` | ||
|
|
||
| Create `ci-operator/config/openshift/oadp-operator/openshift-oadp-operator-oadp-1.4.yaml`. To make it easier, copy the contents of `ci-operator/config/openshift/oadp-operator/openshift-oadp-operator-master.yaml` (if release branch was created from master branch), changing the following. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What about that part of the file? I thought we want to make sure it's inline with the ocp version that the ci is running on?
build_root:
image_stream_tag:
name: builder
namespace: konveyor
tag: ubi9-v1.22.2
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think this is responsibility of this issue #1455
There was a problem hiding this comment.
On the above there is commend As it is not valid anymore after..., so either resurrect there or fix here.
|
|
||
| > **Note**: to get diff between files, you can run `diff -ruN ci-operator/config/openshift/oadp-operator/openshift-oadp-operator-master.yaml ci-operator/config/openshift/oadp-operator/openshift-oadp-operator-oadp-1.4.yaml`. | ||
|
|
||
| Create `ci-operator/config/openshift/oadp-operator/openshift-oadp-operator-oadp-1.4__4.VERSION.yaml` files. To make it easier, copy the contents of `ci-operator/config/openshift/oadp-operator/openshift-oadp-operator-master__4.VERSION.yaml` files (if release branch was created from master branch), changing the following. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There is no such file in the release folder:
$ ls ci-operator/config/openshift/oadp-operator/*VERSION*
ls: cannot access 'ci-operator/config/openshift/oadp-operator/*VERSION*': No such file or directoryThere was a problem hiding this comment.
Here is list of files
$ ls ci-operator/config/openshift/oadp-operator/*
ci-operator/config/openshift/oadp-operator/openshift-oadp-operator-master__4.14.yaml ci-operator/config/openshift/oadp-operator/openshift-oadp-operator-oadp-1.0.yaml ci-operator/config/openshift/oadp-operator/openshift-oadp-operator-oadp-1.4__4.14.yaml
ci-operator/config/openshift/oadp-operator/openshift-oadp-operator-master__4.15.yaml ci-operator/config/openshift/oadp-operator/openshift-oadp-operator-oadp-1.3__4.12.yaml ci-operator/config/openshift/oadp-operator/openshift-oadp-operator-oadp-1.4__4.15.yaml
ci-operator/config/openshift/oadp-operator/openshift-oadp-operator-master__4.16.yaml ci-operator/config/openshift/oadp-operator/openshift-oadp-operator-oadp-1.3__4.13.yaml ci-operator/config/openshift/oadp-operator/openshift-oadp-operator-oadp-1.4__4.16.yaml
ci-operator/config/openshift/oadp-operator/openshift-oadp-operator-master.yaml ci-operator/config/openshift/oadp-operator/openshift-oadp-operator-oadp-1.3__4.14.yaml ci-operator/config/openshift/oadp-operator/openshift-oadp-operator-oadp-1.4.yaml
ci-operator/config/openshift/oadp-operator/openshift-oadp-operator-oadp-1.0__4.12.yaml ci-operator/config/openshift/oadp-operator/openshift-oadp-operator-oadp-1.3__4.15.yaml ci-operator/config/openshift/oadp-operator/OWNERS
ci-operator/config/openshift/oadp-operator/openshift-oadp-operator-oadp-1.0__4.14.yaml ci-operator/config/openshift/oadp-operator/openshift-oadp-operator-oadp-1.3.yaml
There was a problem hiding this comment.
VERSION is the minor version of OCP, the regex should be ci-operator/config/openshift/oadp-operator/openshift-oadp-operator-<branch-name>__4.*.yaml
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ah ok so it's not clear then, it needs to be:
ci-operator/config/openshift/oadp-operator/openshift-oadp-operator-oadp-1.4__4.${MINOR_VERSION}.yamlSigned-off-by: Mateus Oliveira <msouzaol@redhat.com>
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
|
/hold |
openshift-ci
bot
added
the
do-not-merge/hold
|
/unhold |
openshift-ci
bot
removed
the
do-not-merge/hold
|
@kaovilai where do you suggest adding the info? |
|
I thought the same readme here. docs/developer/PROW_CI.md It allows people to issue /override of tests on forks that we do not want to carry changes to OWNERS.md |
Signed-off-by: Mateus Oliveira <msouzaol@redhat.com>
|
@kaovilai done |
|
/retest |
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: kaovilai, mateusoliveira43, shubham-pampattiwar The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. The pull request process is described here
Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
|
/retest |
|
@mateusoliveira43: all tests passed! Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository. I understand the commands that are listed here. |
Why the changes were made
The goal of this PR is to document the steps needed to create a new release branches, so no steps are missed next time we do it. In the future, this should be automated.
Fixes #1227
How to test the changes made
Read the documentation and make sure it is clear. Check referenced PRs in linked issue to see if no steps were missed.