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

Add notes about default track #4

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Mar 11, 2021
Merged

Add notes about default track #4

merged 2 commits into from
Mar 11, 2021

Conversation

rvagg
Copy link
Member

@rvagg rvagg commented Mar 8, 2021

@tbille of Canonical introduced this functionality to me last year and we pinned it to 12 at the time and said we needed to update it when 14 was our latest LTS .. but that didn't happen because it's a manual thing and needs a human to be on top of it!

I've changed it now to 14 but I think this might need to be integrated into our procedures for LTS so it gets done properly. I don't know how much set-and-forget explains usage patterns or whether the default track is a big driver of what gets installed, but currently the Node snap is heavily weighted to 12. Yesterday's stats have active devices @ 22.5k for 12 with the next highest being 4.5k for 14. Which isn't awesome. It might be worth keeping an eye on how this changes now that the default has been changed.

So, I'm wondering if folks currently focusing on LTS have ideas about how to bake this in as a thing that gets done, or we get a reminder at the right time in this repo that it needs to be done? @nodejs/lts

@mhdawson
Copy link
Member

mhdawson commented Mar 8, 2021

@BethGriggs I know there is a list of steps for a new Current but I'm not sure about promotion to LTS. Is there a list for LTS promotion?

@tbille
Copy link

tbille commented Mar 9, 2021

If there is a script that handles the release to LTS you could use the CLI (snapcraft) and run the command: snapcraft set-default-track <track>

This would avoid having someone doing the manual release via the webUI.

@rvagg
Copy link
Member Author

rvagg commented Mar 9, 2021

We could possibly add that to a GitHub Actions script in this repo, we don't currently have snapcraft auth setup from here but I don't imagine that'd be too hard. We'd just need to come up with a strategy for metadata and where this is installed. But tbh it might just be easier if it's part of a manual checklist if the LTS team currently has one - just having an issue opened in this repo should be enough for one of us with access to make the switch.

@richardlau
Copy link
Member

I know there is a list of steps for a new Current but I'm not sure about promotion to LTS. Is there a list for LTS promotion?

https://github.com/nodejs/node/blob/master/doc/guides/releases.md#lts-releases

README.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Co-authored-by: Richard Lau <rlau@redhat.com>
@rvagg rvagg merged commit f5f4f9f into master Mar 11, 2021
@rvagg rvagg deleted the rvagg/default-track branch March 11, 2021 03:19
rvagg added a commit to rvagg/io.js that referenced this pull request Mar 11, 2021
rvagg added a commit that referenced this pull request Apr 21, 2021
Co-authored-by: Richard Lau <rlau@redhat.com>
rvagg added a commit that referenced this pull request Apr 21, 2021
Co-authored-by: Richard Lau <rlau@redhat.com>
rvagg added a commit that referenced this pull request Apr 21, 2021
Co-authored-by: Richard Lau <rlau@redhat.com>
rvagg added a commit that referenced this pull request Apr 21, 2021
Co-authored-by: Richard Lau <rlau@redhat.com>
rvagg added a commit to rvagg/io.js that referenced this pull request Apr 26, 2021
rvagg added a commit to rvagg/io.js that referenced this pull request Apr 26, 2021
rvagg added a commit to rvagg/io.js that referenced this pull request Apr 26, 2021
targos pushed a commit to nodejs/node that referenced this pull request Apr 27, 2021
PR-URL: #37708
Refs: nodejs/snap#4
Reviewed-By: Michaël Zasso <targos@protonmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Shelley Vohr <codebytere@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Ash Cripps <acripps@redhat.com>
Reviewed-By: Beth Griggs <bgriggs@redhat.com>
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
targos pushed a commit to nodejs/node that referenced this pull request Apr 29, 2021
PR-URL: #37708
Refs: nodejs/snap#4
Reviewed-By: Michaël Zasso <targos@protonmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Shelley Vohr <codebytere@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Ash Cripps <acripps@redhat.com>
Reviewed-By: Beth Griggs <bgriggs@redhat.com>
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
targos pushed a commit to nodejs/node that referenced this pull request May 30, 2021
PR-URL: #37708
Refs: nodejs/snap#4
Reviewed-By: Michaël Zasso <targos@protonmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Shelley Vohr <codebytere@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Ash Cripps <acripps@redhat.com>
Reviewed-By: Beth Griggs <bgriggs@redhat.com>
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
targos pushed a commit to nodejs/node that referenced this pull request Jun 5, 2021
PR-URL: #37708
Refs: nodejs/snap#4
Reviewed-By: Michaël Zasso <targos@protonmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Shelley Vohr <codebytere@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Ash Cripps <acripps@redhat.com>
Reviewed-By: Beth Griggs <bgriggs@redhat.com>
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
targos pushed a commit to nodejs/node that referenced this pull request Jun 5, 2021
PR-URL: #37708
Refs: nodejs/snap#4
Reviewed-By: Michaël Zasso <targos@protonmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Shelley Vohr <codebytere@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Ash Cripps <acripps@redhat.com>
Reviewed-By: Beth Griggs <bgriggs@redhat.com>
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
targos pushed a commit to nodejs/node that referenced this pull request Jun 11, 2021
PR-URL: #37708
Refs: nodejs/snap#4
Reviewed-By: Michaël Zasso <targos@protonmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Shelley Vohr <codebytere@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Ash Cripps <acripps@redhat.com>
Reviewed-By: Beth Griggs <bgriggs@redhat.com>
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
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.

4 participants