-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 75
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
Staging for version increment automation #624
Conversation
Signed-off-by: pgodithi <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: prudhvigodithi <[email protected]>
Referred old 1.x version increment PR #611 |
@prudhvigodithi It seems like infra isn't actively building 1.4.0. Should that start happening before we continue developing on 1.x set on 1.4.0. For example this branch will continue being unstable with no 1.4.0 JS or common-utils until we either move to a different version or infra starts building 1.4.0 as well. |
Hey @amitgalitz the reason I have created a PR for 1.x so that this can be backported to 1.3 branch and should be covered when we are at 1.3.5 release. |
Hey @amitgalitz @ohltyler can you please check this PR and merge if all good? |
@prudhvigodithi because we have already bumped |
wouldn't moving this branch to 1.3.5 cause issues for the auto version increment plugin since it is based on our version being the same as core for Y branch. Core currently points to 1.4, so based off the effort to make every plugin be the same as core. All plugins should be pointing to 1.4 and we should actively be building 1.4.@prudhvigodithi can you give further clarification on this? Our documentation says that 1.x should point to next minor release which would be 1.4 but this isn't getting built for some reason |
Hey 1.x is for next minor version thats true, but any feature, enhancement we push, its should to 1.x and backported to other 1.x (example 1.3) branches (unless the fix or patch is only for 1.3 then the PR should be directly to 1.3 branch). |
Understood - thanks for the explanation! |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thank you for pushing this to 1.x branch and I understand why it needs to be here. I just meant to highlight in above comments why 1.x branch CI will always fail
The backport to
To backport manually, run these commands in your terminal: # Fetch latest updates from GitHub
git fetch
# Create a new working tree
git worktree add .worktrees/backport-1.3 1.3
# Navigate to the new working tree
cd .worktrees/backport-1.3
# Create a new branch
git switch --create backport/backport-624-to-1.3
# Cherry-pick the merged commit of this pull request and resolve the conflicts
git cherry-pick -x --mainline 1 81f4c7a0f3c82b699294565e4d9af629beb06c01
# Push it to GitHub
git push --set-upstream origin backport/backport-624-to-1.3
# Go back to the original working tree
cd ../..
# Delete the working tree
git worktree remove .worktrees/backport-1.3 Then, create a pull request where the |
Hey @amitgalitz @ohltyler I see backport for 1.3 failed can you please take a look? |
Description
This is the staging PR for to execute workflows that auto raise the version increment PR's
Example: prudhvigodithi#1
Issues Resolved
Part of: opensearch-project/opensearch-build#1375
From solution: opensearch-project/opensearch-build#1375 (comment)
Related issue: #605
By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache 2.0 license.
For more information on following Developer Certificate of Origin and signing off your commits, please check here.