-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 502
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
automated build trigger and validation of RPMs/Debs #631
Comments
Also see kubernetes/sig-release#302 |
As a kubeadm maintainer, this would make my job of validating releases much easier. |
@liztio you can use the bazel tooling to generate debs and rpms locally today. What are the gaps between the spec files there and the ones here? cc: @timothysc |
I can, but it's time consuming and slow. I have to use a separate machine because bazel doesn't support cross compilation from OSX yet. Plus we've had discrepancies in the bazel / shell release process debs before. |
The specs in kubernetes/release/debian and kubernetes/kubernetes/build/debs have drifted a bit, and someone should probably unify them again. I'm not sure exactly how they differ. Also, the "official" debs (using kubernetes/release/debian) use the outputs from the non-bazel builds, which may be different. (One notable issue is that the bazel-built debs only support linux/amd64.) |
this was my mistake, ignore me! |
@liztio did you build at |
@ixdy I get the same results when building from that tag, but I also use make not bazel. Also I consider it onerous to force everyone to rebuild from tag. Ideally we'd like to get real beta-testers in the wild. |
@ixdy ah my bad. I didn't re-checkout when I moved from my local machine to a remote linux box. Ignore me! |
@timothysc to be clear, I do agree with you. we really do need to integrate rpm/deb building with the release process. |
Also -beta and -rc debs/rpms ought to go into a different repo than the official release ones. |
note from @calebamiles
|
Issues go stale after 90d of inactivity. If this issue is safe to close now please do so with Send feedback to sig-testing, kubernetes/test-infra and/or fejta. |
/remove-lifecycle stale |
Issues go stale after 90d of inactivity. If this issue is safe to close now please do so with Send feedback to sig-testing, kubernetes/test-infra and/or fejta. |
@tpepper still valid? |
/remove-lifecycle stale |
/help |
Issues go stale after 90d of inactivity. If this issue is safe to close now please do so with Send feedback to sig-testing, kubernetes/test-infra and/or fejta. |
/remove-lifecycle stale |
/milestone v1.17 |
@listx: You must be a member of the kubernetes/milestone-maintainers GitHub team to set the milestone. If you believe you should be able to issue the /milestone command, please contact your and have them propose you as an additional delegate for this responsibility. 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/test-infra repository. |
Issues go stale after 90d of inactivity. If this issue is safe to close now please do so with Send feedback to sig-testing, kubernetes/test-infra and/or fejta. |
Stale issues rot after 30d of inactivity. If this issue is safe to close now please do so with Send feedback to sig-testing, kubernetes/test-infra and/or fejta. |
Rotten issues close after 30d of inactivity. Send feedback to sig-testing, kubernetes/test-infra and/or fejta. |
@fejta-bot: Closing this issue. 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/test-infra repository. |
/remove-lifecycle rotten Part of kubernetes/sig-release#1372. |
@justaugustus: Reopened this issue. 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/test-infra repository. |
Today we have a release step of pinging @mbohlool or @jpbetz on Slack indicating that RPMs/Debs need built for a particular "1.X.y-{beta|rc}". This needs automated. Similarly once, built folks have manually discovered build issues, since the artifacts don't have pre-publication automated validation. This all needs automated to tighten up and improve the build process. Ideally we'd turn the full release crank for all of alpha/beta/rc and final releases in order to always know the process is healthy.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: