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

STF 1.5.4 release ops #129

Merged
merged 9 commits into from
Feb 14, 2024
Merged

STF 1.5.4 release ops #129

merged 9 commits into from
Feb 14, 2024

Conversation

vkmc
Copy link
Contributor

@vkmc vkmc commented Feb 8, 2024

No description provided.

elfiesmelfie and others added 9 commits November 1, 2023 17:39
* Add prometheus to devstack plugin

* Add uidmap installation for ubuntu distributions

In order to interact with podman, we need the newuidmap binary.
I've seen this being present on centos vms by default, but
on some ubuntu / debian vms this isn't the case and the
plugin fails to pull images.
Instead of updating the .zuul.yaml file everytime
infrawatch/service-telemetry-operator adds a new job, the
project-template can be updated in STO, which will propogate the change
to the project and avoid leaving gaps in testing.

Depends-On: infrawatch/service-telemetry-operator#514
Often times during unstack, containers get stuck in "Stopping" state and do not get cleaned up. These left over containers cause next run of stack.sh to fail because the script tries to spawn them with the name same.
Remove sg-core & prometheus containers with force
* Move to golang 1.20

* Bump golangci-lint to 1.51 for golang 1.20 support
@vkmc vkmc changed the title Release prep 1.5.4 STF 1.5.4 release ops Feb 8, 2024
@vkmc
Copy link
Contributor Author

vkmc commented Feb 8, 2024

recheck

@vkmc vkmc changed the base branch from master to stable-1.5 February 8, 2024 18:09
@leifmadsen
Copy link
Member

None of the changes here seem related to STF functionality (more to do with devstack and RHOSO 18). Do we really need this merge to stable-1.5? (which is focused on only STF related functionality)?

@leifmadsen leifmadsen added the question Further information is requested label Feb 8, 2024
@csibbitt
Copy link
Contributor

csibbitt commented Feb 8, 2024

None of the changes here seem related to STF functionality (more to do with devstack and RHOSO 18). Do we really need this merge to stable-1.5? (which is focused on only STF related functionality)?

Interesting observation! We definitely need a rebuild of this container on golang 1.20, but I cherry-picked that change awhile ago when the priority was set higher and we thought there would be an async release. I think you're right that we could otherwise not bother with this PR and just tag/rebuild what is already on the stable-1.5 branch.

OTOH, merging this seems entirely risk-free and means we've followed the expected pattern and won't have to consider this again next time.

@leifmadsen
Copy link
Member

None of the changes here seem related to STF functionality (more to do with devstack and RHOSO 18). Do we really need this merge to stable-1.5? (which is focused on only STF related functionality)?

Interesting observation! We definitely need a rebuild of this container on golang 1.20, but I cherry-picked that change awhile ago when the priority was set higher and we thought there would be an async release. I think you're right that we could otherwise not bother with this PR and just tag/rebuild what is already on the stable-1.5 branch.

OTOH, merging this seems entirely risk-free and means we've followed the expected pattern and won't have to consider this again next time.

So the base image for golang is entirely controlled downstream, independent of merging anything here (unless there were code changes required or go.mod updates etc to satisfy for that).

I agree though, there is very little to no risk here to merge this down as-is. I just wanted to note these changes are primarily directed at RHOSO 18, and we need to be aware that stable-1.5 needs to be kept free of any future features or changes related to RHOSO in order to keep STF stable.

Going forward, I will expect sg-core to get a separate rhoso-18 branch (or something like that) and for work landing in master to be primarily driven towards RHOSO 18, and any bugs we find that would also affect STF to simply be cherry-picked into stable-1.5, with no future master->stable-1.5 merges happening (pending of course what the changes ultimately are).

@vkmc
Copy link
Contributor Author

vkmc commented Feb 12, 2024

recheck

@csibbitt
Copy link
Contributor

So the base image for golang is entirely controlled downstream, independent of merging anything here (unless there were code changes required or go.mod updates etc to satisfy for that).

Agreed that the downstream base image is controlled elsewhere, but changing the go version does require a change to go.mod (35d6fbe#diff-33ef32bf6c23acb95f5902d7097b7a1d5128ca061167ec0716715b0b9eeaa5f6L3) I'm unsure what happens if we build in the 1.20 container with a go.mod that says 1.19.

Going forward, I will expect sg-core to get a separate rhoso-18 branch (or something like that) and for work landing in master to be primarily driven towards RHOSO 18, and any bugs we find that would also affect STF to simply be cherry-picked into stable-1.5, with no future master->stable-1.5 merges happening (pending of course what the changes ultimately are).

This is a very good point - @vkmc , we were talking about how every repo seems like it can follow the simple master -> stable-1.5 merge workflow this time (and hoped for that for the future, too), but it looks like this will need to be an exception. As Leif mentions, future feature work will be targetting a rhoso-18 branch, and we should only be cherry-picking specific changes that are needed for security updates to stable-1.5. We should update the README in this repo to mention that, and also add it to our release process documentation.

@leifmadsen
Copy link
Member

So the base image for golang is entirely controlled downstream, independent of merging anything here (unless there were code changes required or go.mod updates etc to satisfy for that).

Agreed that the downstream base image is controlled elsewhere, but changing the go version does require a change to go.mod (35d6fbe#diff-33ef32bf6c23acb95f5902d7097b7a1d5128ca061167ec0716715b0b9eeaa5f6L3) I'm unsure what happens if we build in the 1.20 container with a go.mod that says 1.19.

Ah good point! I didn't realize go.mod also had a version association. I'll try and store that somewhere in my brain.

Going forward, I will expect sg-core to get a separate rhoso-18 branch (or something like that) and for work landing in master to be primarily driven towards RHOSO 18, and any bugs we find that would also affect STF to simply be cherry-picked into stable-1.5, with no future master->stable-1.5 merges happening (pending of course what the changes ultimately are).

This is a very good point - @vkmc , we were talking about how every repo seems like it can follow the simple master -> stable-1.5 merge workflow this time (and hoped for that for the future, too), but it looks like this will need to be an exception. As Leif mentions, future feature work will be targetting a rhoso-18 branch, and we should only be cherry-picking specific changes that are needed for security updates to stable-1.5. We should update the README in this repo to mention that, and also add it to our release process documentation.

Yea I'm not exactly sure how this will work, but I would suggest sync'ing with the OSP squad and RelDel to make sure there is an understanding what should/will happen here.

Based on some other discussions it looked like there was potential new development, and we want to make sure that's not landing in stable-1.5 and have to deal with regressions in STF 1.5 for future work. Ideally nothing really lands in stable-1.5 going forward, but if there are CVE fixes for some reason that aren't just base image changes, and we need to import, I'd just hate to spend time debugging.

Might not be a real issue, but something to keep in mind. I think sg-core is the only repo that will be used across projects.

@vkmc vkmc removed the question Further information is requested label Feb 14, 2024
@vkmc vkmc merged commit 02aeeb6 into stable-1.5 Feb 14, 2024
11 of 17 checks passed
@vkmc vkmc deleted the release-prep-1.5.4 branch February 14, 2024 18:13
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants