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

NETOBSERV-192 Release action #91

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Mar 7, 2022

Conversation

jotak
Copy link
Member

@jotak jotak commented Mar 4, 2022

Similar to the existing push-to-quay action, except it's triggered from
tags and will push just 1 image built using that tag as version.

https://issues.redhat.com/browse/NETOBSERV-192

Similar to the existing push-to-quay action, except it's triggered from
tags and will push just 1 image built using that tag as version.

https://issues.redhat.com/browse/NETOBSERV-192
@jotak
Copy link
Member Author

jotak commented Mar 4, 2022

I'd like to give a try to this "release action" first on the console plugin repo, and if we're happy with it then we can generalize to the other repos
Note that I tested some parts of the action here: https://github.com/jotak/test-actions/actions

Copy link
Collaborator

@OlivierCazade OlivierCazade left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM, my comments are more open questions

name: release to quay.io
on:
push:
tags: [v*]
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

My understanding is that this build is going to be triggered by any branch as long as there is tag, should we try to limit this?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I don't think we should limit, because tags are not limited to main, for instance v0.1.0 was done on branch release-4.10.

uses: actions/setup-go@v2
with:
go-version: ${{ matrix.go }}
- name: build images
Copy link
Collaborator

@OlivierCazade OlivierCazade Mar 4, 2022

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

May be we could try to use the existing build?

In my opinion building again does not make a difference when creating a new release candidate, but may be better when promoting a release candidate

Copy link
Member Author

@jotak jotak Mar 4, 2022

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

there is actually a difference: if we tag then build, the tag version will be passed into the program vars for displaying version, cf https://github.com/netobserv/network-observability-console-plugin/blob/main/Makefile#L80
But, I get the point of promoting an existing image that is already properly tested. There's a tradeoff to do here. Either we rebuild, with the small probability to have something wrong in that build (but builds should be reproducible consistently, so in theory it shouldn't happen) ; or we just promote an existing image, but it won't show the desired version in logs.

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I did not think about version injection.
I agree that rebuilding here is a reasonable risk.

@jotak jotak added the no-qe This PR doesn't necessitate QE approval label Mar 7, 2022
@jotak
Copy link
Member Author

jotak commented Mar 7, 2022

/approve
thanks for the reviews

@openshift-ci
Copy link

openshift-ci bot commented Mar 7, 2022

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: jotak

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 /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the approved label Mar 7, 2022
@openshift-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot merged commit a33b261 into netobserv:main Mar 7, 2022
@jotak jotak deleted the release-action branch November 7, 2024 10:47
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
approved lgtm no-qe This PR doesn't necessitate QE approval
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants