Skip to content

Conversation

@rhoerr
Copy link
Contributor

@rhoerr rhoerr commented Oct 3, 2025

PR Checklist

Please check if your PR fulfills the following requirements:

PR Type

What kind of change does this PR introduce?

  • Bugfix
  • Feature
  • Code style update (formatting, local variables)
  • Refactoring (no functional changes, no api changes)
  • Build related changes
  • CI related changes
  • Documentation content changes
  • Other... Please describe:

What is the current behavior?

Installation and integration tests fail for 2.3.7 to 2.4.1 because they require Composer 1, which no longer works. Packagist ended Composer 1 support as of September 01 2025.

Fixes: https://github.com/mage-os/generate-mirror-repo-js/actions/runs/18158077121

What is the new behavior?

No longer attempts to build versions below Magento 2.4.2.

Does this PR introduce a breaking change?

  • Yes
  • No

Will no longer support Magento versions below 2.4.2 (but they're already inherently broken).

Other information

@rhoerr rhoerr requested a review from a team as a code owner October 3, 2025 02:11
@rhoerr
Copy link
Contributor Author

rhoerr commented Oct 3, 2025

@damienwebdev Is this an appropriate change, given the circumstances?

Installation and integration tests fail for 2.3.7 to 2.4.1 because they require Composer 1, which no longer works. Packagist ended Composer 1 support as of September 01 2025.

Fixes: https://github.com/mage-os/generate-mirror-repo-js/actions/runs/18158077121

@fballiano
Copy link
Contributor

I proposed to remove the old beta releases before, so I completely agree on this PR.

@rhoerr
Copy link
Contributor Author

rhoerr commented Oct 3, 2025

Latest mirror build has integrity checks mostly fixed, except for these affecting 2.3.7-2.4.1, and preexisting constraint edge cases for a couple releases in 2.4.4 and 2.4.5. https://github.com/mage-os/generate-mirror-repo-js/actions/runs/18217417183

fballiano
fballiano previously approved these changes Oct 3, 2025
@damienwebdev damienwebdev self-requested a review October 3, 2025 13:40
Copy link
Member

@damienwebdev damienwebdev left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I kinda feel like we need a different kind for this use-case. Perhaps useable.

Most people (from my original repo and what I use internally) use currently-supported (the default)

all (what the generate-mirror-repo-js uses) is a special use-case for people who need to enumerate the whole list of all magento releases. When @danslo wrote that workflow, that made sense. However, given that software is not stagnant, what he may instead of have meant to say was all-useable or useable or all-modern.

Instead of modifying the raw data, what we should instead do is modify get-matrix-for-kind to handle this new kind (Also adding docs as necessary)

The only complexity I can think of is how "useable" is determined. I'd probably add a flag to the raw json data on each version indicating whether its currently useable or not. We could instead do it based upon some unique computation of "is it composer 1", "is it RabbitMQ 1+", etc, but that sounds painful and esoteric. I'd rather just decide based upon world events (the deprecation of composer 1 for example) when something becomes unusable.

@rhoerr
Copy link
Contributor Author

rhoerr commented Oct 3, 2025

Thanks Damien. I'll see what that means in terms of real world changes here.

I like the useable kind of flag idea. Simple enough concept.

I think this isn't a blocker for the next release round in ~10 days, so we can take some time to get it right. We can and have chosen to ignore certain integrity test errors at times for expedience. This doesn't break processes, just throws unavoidable warnings right now.

@fballiano
Copy link
Contributor

generating a mirror release is becoming slower and slower the more versions we have, in my opinion removing stuff that can't be used anyway is priority to make the processes a bit faster allowing us to work better

@rhoerr
Copy link
Contributor Author

rhoerr commented Oct 25, 2025

Be that as it may, preserving mirror integrity seems better than temporarily shaving a few minutes off build times. Dropping build times will require fundamental changes to how we actually build historical releases, in a sense that we'd probably best not rebuild them at all. But that's a very different undertaking I'm not sure any of us have time for now.

For now, I added a usable kind per Damien's suggestion, and restored those old versions. Tests pass green. This will require a separate change to the mirror workflow to switch the matrix type and skip those old versions in testing.

I opted to do the evaluation in code (whether composer < 2), rather than adding a usable flag per version. This way we just need to update the rules there if any such issues happen in the future.

@damienwebdev , ready for review again when convenient. Should be fully backwards compatible.

@rhoerr rhoerr changed the title fix: remove versions dependent on EOL composer 1 fix: allow matrix testing without EOL versions Oct 26, 2025
@damienwebdev damienwebdev self-requested a review November 4, 2025 13:56
Copy link
Member

@damienwebdev damienwebdev left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This looks fantastic @rhoerr ! The only comments I have are that the action.yml and the README are missing the new kind.

@rhoerr
Copy link
Contributor Author

rhoerr commented Nov 5, 2025

@damienwebdev Thanks -- updated readme and action.yml.

@damienwebdev damienwebdev self-requested a review November 5, 2025 00:47
Copy link
Member

@damienwebdev damienwebdev left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Lgtm

@rhoerr rhoerr merged commit ce264fc into mage-os:main Nov 5, 2025
119 of 147 checks passed
@rhoerr rhoerr deleted the fix/composer-1-eol branch November 5, 2025 00:51
@mage-os-ci mage-os-ci mentioned this pull request Nov 5, 2025
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.

3 participants