Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Sync from upstream on a timed schedule #264

Merged

Conversation

tedjpoole
Copy link
Contributor

This PR makes the envoy-sync-receive.yaml workflow a no-op, because we don't want to be triggered too often by the high rate of upstream commits. However, it is left in place so that
(1) it saves having to modify the upstream envoy-sync.yaml workflow, to remove the dispatch code, and
(2) we can more easily reinstate the push behaviour if/when needed (e.g. on just release/v1.xx branches, but not main).

The new envoy-sync-scheduled.yaml workflow performs a sync from upstream on a timed schedule instead, allowing us to better control when and how often synchronisation is performed thus reducing the noise and the number of (expensive) builds.

Signed-off-by: Ted Poole <tpoole@redhat.com>
@tedjpoole
Copy link
Contributor Author

Note that this targets the release/v1.28 branch because that is the current default branch, and scheduled workflows only run from the default branch.

@tedjpoole
Copy link
Contributor Author

Also note that for some (not really debugged yet) reason, upstream was only ever invoking our envoy-sync-receive.yaml workflow for the main branch, so the release/v1.xx branches were effectively not automated.
However, the new envoy-sync-scheduled.yaml workflow does automate the synchronisation of all specified branches as expected.

@tedjpoole tedjpoole merged commit 525b92b into envoyproxy:release/v1.28 Oct 4, 2024
5 checks passed
@tedjpoole tedjpoole deleted the scheduled-sync-from-upstream branch October 4, 2024 08:03
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants