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

chore: Define check in release process ensuring migration guide is defined in a major version #2171

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Apr 19, 2024

Conversation

AgustinBettati
Copy link
Member

@AgustinBettati AgustinBettati commented Apr 18, 2024

Description

Link to any related issue(s): CLOUDP-244149

If we ever forget to define the migration guide for a major version (vX.Y.0) the release process will stop automatically. This is already stated in our docs.

Testing

Type of change:

  • Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue). Please, add the "bug" label to the PR.
  • New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality). Please, add the "enhancement" label to the PR. A migration guide must be created or updated if the new feature will go in a major version.
  • Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected). Please, add the "breaking change" label to the PR. A migration guide must be created or updated.
  • This change requires a documentation update
  • Documentation fix/enhancement

Required Checklist:

  • I have signed the MongoDB CLA
  • I have read the contributing guides
  • I have checked that this change does not generate any credentials and that they are NOT accidentally logged anywhere.
  • I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works per HashiCorp requirements
  • I have added any necessary documentation (if appropriate)
  • I have run make fmt and formatted my code
  • If changes include deprecations or removals, I defined an isolated PR with a relevant title as it will be used in the auto-generated changelog.
  • If changes include removal or addition of 3rd party GitHub actions, I updated our internal document. Reach out to the APIx Integration slack channel to get access to the internal document.

Further comments

@AgustinBettati AgustinBettati force-pushed the CLOUDP-244149 branch 2 times, most recently from e58f47d to d50eb1d Compare April 18, 2024 12:33
@AgustinBettati AgustinBettati marked this pull request as ready for review April 18, 2024 15:18
@AgustinBettati AgustinBettati requested a review from a team as a code owner April 18, 2024 15:18
UPGRADE_GUIDE_PATH="website/docs/guides/$MAJOR.$MINOR.$PATCH-upgrade-guide.html.markdown"
echo "Checking for the presence of $UPGRADE_GUIDE_PATH"
if [ ! -f "$UPGRADE_GUIDE_PATH" ]; then
echo "Stopping release process, upgrade guide $UPGRADE_GUIDE_PATH does not exist. Please visit our releasing documentation for more details."
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Preferred to keep it more generic so the reference does not breaking moving forward, but no strong opinion

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 link to the RELEASE.md instead of the exact section


update-examples-reference-in-docs:
needs: [ release-config, validate-version-input ]
needs: [ release-config, validate-inputs ]
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

knit: similary to validate-inputs i don't know if it would be better to have an update job with both references in doc and changelog header. or maybe it's better as it is now

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Since the commits are being done by calling an external workflow we do not have the possibility of having both in a single job

Copy link
Member

@lantoli lantoli left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

"Verify upgrade guide is defined" section in RELEASING.md can be updated or deleted

@lantoli
Copy link
Member

lantoli commented Apr 19, 2024

knit: look at this PR I was thinking that it might be useful to have a way to know if the release process will probably success without running it, e.g.:

  • Having a dryrun mode input param to check if the release could be done without actually doing it
  • Having the validates in a different workflow so it can be run without doing the release process

this could help to anticipate and fix problems in the release

@AgustinBettati
Copy link
Member Author

AgustinBettati commented Apr 19, 2024

@lantoli responding here:

"Verify upgrade guide is defined" section in RELEASING.md can be updated or deleted

While it can be completely deleted, prefered to keep it as it describes what the upgrade guide must have. In the failure of the job we referencing to the releasing docs for more info.

dryrun mode input param to check if the release could be done without actually doing it

A prerelease would be the most similar to a dry run process. However I doubt we will likely make use of this in a regular release, maybe in case we encounter specific issues and want to do a test run.

@lantoli
Copy link
Member

lantoli commented Apr 19, 2024

"Verify upgrade guide is defined" section in RELEASING.md can be updated or deleted. While it can be completely deleted, prefered to keep it as it describes what the upgrade guide must have. In the failure of the job we referencing to the releasing docs for more info.

at least i would comment in the doc that there is an automatic check

@AgustinBettati AgustinBettati merged commit 91a38e6 into master Apr 19, 2024
31 checks passed
@AgustinBettati AgustinBettati deleted the CLOUDP-244149 branch April 19, 2024 09:55
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.

None yet

5 participants