Skip to content

Conversation

@katarzyna-koltun-mx
Copy link
Collaborator

No description provided.

@katarzyna-koltun-mx katarzyna-koltun-mx self-assigned this Apr 10, 2025
Copy link
Collaborator

@MarkvanMents MarkvanMents left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@katarzyna-koltun-mx
I've made a couple of comments here. But generally looks good.

Comment on lines -11 to -12
Mendix Cloud deployments are also dependent on the latest version of the [Mendix Cloud Foundry Buildpack](https://github.com/mendix/cf-mendix-buildpack). The [Mendix Cloud Foundry Buildpack release notes](https://github.com/mendix/cf-mendix-buildpack/releases) are published separately, as other deployment targets are also dependent on the buildpack.

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Is there the equivalent for Kubernetes, or is it completely hidden from customers?

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We had a discussion on how to do this. The Mendix Cloud platform has several platform components that will be updated regularly as well. We want to allow customers to track the updates of these platform components and "pin" their deployments to specific versions, so that they get the exact same experience across environments.
If we do this, it would make sense to give customers insight into changes between the platform component versions. And that means we need to publish release notes somewhere. Still under discussion what would be the best place for that, as the teams expect frequent, small releases.

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We could add a new set of release notes, or just add them to Mendix Cloud release notes.
The reason they were separate for M2ee is that M2ee is used by other sorts of deployment as well. If this is purely Mendix Cloud, then I would suggest adding them to the Mx Cloud release notes.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Release notes are an open question, publishing as is for now.

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Don't forget to copy to Mx11 branch!

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Tbr with the Mx11 branch.

Copy link
Collaborator

@feddovanede feddovanede left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Most of it looks good to me! Left some comments.

| `permissions-policy: interest-cohort=()` | Exclude from Federated Learning of Cohorts (FLoC) calculation |
| `strict-transport-security` | TLS terminating webservers – set to `max-age=31536000` (365 days, in seconds)|
| `x-vcap-request-id` | Cloud Foundry to track requests through CF |
| `X-Request-ID` | Kubernetes to track requests through CF |
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Same here:

Kubernetes to track requests through CF

should be

Kubernetes to track requests through Kubernetes

or

Kubernetes to track requests through the Mendix Cloud platform

Comment on lines -11 to -12
Mendix Cloud deployments are also dependent on the latest version of the [Mendix Cloud Foundry Buildpack](https://github.com/mendix/cf-mendix-buildpack). The [Mendix Cloud Foundry Buildpack release notes](https://github.com/mendix/cf-mendix-buildpack/releases) are published separately, as other deployment targets are also dependent on the buildpack.

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We had a discussion on how to do this. The Mendix Cloud platform has several platform components that will be updated regularly as well. We want to allow customers to track the updates of these platform components and "pin" their deployments to specific versions, so that they get the exact same experience across environments.
If we do this, it would make sense to give customers insight into changes between the platform component versions. And that means we need to publish release notes somewhere. Still under discussion what would be the best place for that, as the teams expect frequent, small releases.

Copy link
Collaborator

@MarkvanMents MarkvanMents left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Responded to some of the comments with my thoughts. But eventually down to Kasia and Feddo to agree between them.

Comment on lines -11 to -12
Mendix Cloud deployments are also dependent on the latest version of the [Mendix Cloud Foundry Buildpack](https://github.com/mendix/cf-mendix-buildpack). The [Mendix Cloud Foundry Buildpack release notes](https://github.com/mendix/cf-mendix-buildpack/releases) are published separately, as other deployment targets are also dependent on the buildpack.

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We could add a new set of release notes, or just add them to Mendix Cloud release notes.
The reason they were separate for M2ee is that M2ee is used by other sorts of deployment as well. If this is purely Mendix Cloud, then I would suggest adding them to the Mx Cloud release notes.

@katarzyna-koltun-mx katarzyna-koltun-mx merged commit 38f0fc4 into development May 27, 2025
2 checks passed
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