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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

DOCS OBSDOCS-846 - Logging 5.7.12 Release Notes #73272

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Mar 28, 2024
Merged

DOCS OBSDOCS-846 - Logging 5.7.12 Release Notes #73272

merged 1 commit into from Mar 28, 2024

Conversation

shreyasiddhartha
Copy link
Contributor

@shreyasiddhartha shreyasiddhartha commented Mar 18, 2024 •
edited

Change type: Doc update; Logging Z-Stream Release Notes - 5.7.12
Doc JIRA: https://issues.redhat.com/browse/OBSDOCS-846

Fix Version: 4.11, 4.12, 4.13, 4.14

Note: Since this branch isn't from main, I have created PRs for each versions. This PR is for 4.14.
4.13: #73851
4.12: #73852
4.11: #73853

Doc Preview: https://73272--ocpdocs-pr.netlify.app/openshift-enterprise/latest/logging/logging_release_notes/logging-5-7-release-notes#logging-release-notes-5-7-12_logging-5-7-release-notes

SME Review: @periklis
QE Review: @anpingli
Peer Review: @mletalie

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files. label Mar 18, 2024
@ocpdocs-previewbot
Copy link

ocpdocs-previewbot commented Mar 18, 2024 •
edited

🤖 Thu Mar 28 09:21:21 - Prow CI generated the docs preview:
https://73272--ocpdocs-pr.netlify.app

@shreyasiddhartha shreyasiddhartha force-pushed the logging-5.7.12-rn-4.14 branch 2 times, most recently from 369be70 to da4147c Compare March 26, 2024 09:08
periklis
periklis reviewed Mar 26, 2024
View reviewed changes
Copy link

@periklis periklis left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

@anpingli
Copy link

LGTM

@shreyasiddhartha
Copy link
Contributor Author

/label peer-review-needed

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the peer-review-needed Signifies that the peer review team needs to review this PR label Mar 27, 2024
mletalie
mletalie reviewed Mar 27, 2024
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@mletalie mletalie left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

/label peer-review-in-progress

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the peer-review-in-progress Signifies that the peer review team is reviewing this PR label Mar 27, 2024
mletalie
mletalie reviewed Mar 27, 2024
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@mletalie mletalie left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

/label peer-review-done
/remove-label peer-review-needed
/remove-label peer-review-in-progress
/lgtm

modules/logging-release-notes-5-7-12.adoc Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
modules/logging-release-notes-5-7-12.adoc Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
modules/logging-release-notes-5-7-12.adoc Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@mletalie
Copy link
Contributor

Hello @shreyasiddhartha,
Good job on this PR! Had a couple of comments/questions, otherwise LGTM!

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added peer-review-done Signifies that the peer review team has reviewed this PR and removed peer-review-needed Signifies that the peer review team needs to review this PR peer-review-in-progress Signifies that the peer review team is reviewing this PR labels Mar 27, 2024
@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. and removed lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. labels Mar 27, 2024
@openshift-ci OpenShift CI
Copy link

openshift-ci bot commented Mar 28, 2024

New changes are detected. LGTM label has been removed.

@openshift-ci OpenShift CI
Copy link

openshift-ci bot commented Mar 28, 2024

@shreyasiddhartha: all tests passed!

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard.

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. I understand the commands that are listed here.

This was referenced Mar 28, 2024
Merged
Merged
Closed
@shreyasiddhartha
Copy link
Contributor Author

/label merge-review-needed

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the merge-review-needed Signifies that the merge review team needs to review this PR label Mar 28, 2024
@bergerhoffer
Copy link
Contributor

/label merge-review-in-progress

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the merge-review-in-progress Signifies that the merge review team is reviewing this PR label Mar 28, 2024
@bergerhoffer bergerhoffer added this to the Continuous Release milestone Mar 28, 2024
bergerhoffer
bergerhoffer reviewed Mar 28, 2024
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@bergerhoffer bergerhoffer left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Just one minor thing, but I won't hold up the merge over it!

modules/logging-release-notes-5-7-12.adoc
* Before this update, the Loki Operator checked if the pods were running to decide if the `LokiStack` was ready. With this update, it also checks if the pods are ready, so that the readiness of the `LokiStack` reflects the state of its components. (link:https://issues.redhat.com/browse/LOG-5172[LOG-5172])


* Before this update, the Red Hat build pipeline didn't use the existing build details in Loki builds and omitted information such as revision, branch, and version. With this update, the Red Hat build pipeline now adds these details to the Loki builds, fixing the issue. (link:https://issues.redhat.com/browse/LOG-5202[LOG-5202])
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Shouldn't use contractions. But I won't hold up the merge if this is the only thing

Suggested change
* Before this update, the Red Hat build pipeline didn't use the existing build details in Loki builds and omitted information such as revision, branch, and version. With this update, the Red Hat build pipeline now adds these details to the Loki builds, fixing the issue. (link:https://issues.redhat.com/browse/LOG-5202[LOG-5202])
* Before this update, the Red Hat build pipeline did not use the existing build details in Loki builds and omitted information such as revision, branch, and version. With this update, the Red Hat build pipeline now adds these details to the Loki builds, fixing the issue. (link:https://issues.redhat.com/browse/LOG-5202[LOG-5202])

@bergerhoffer bergerhoffer merged commit c66ebf5 into openshift:enterprise-4.14 Mar 28, 2024
2 checks passed
@bergerhoffer
Copy link
Contributor

@shreyasiddhartha Same thing as the other PR I merged for you - let us know if the manual cherry picks also need to be merged by adding the merge-review-needed labels on those.

Same thing about 4.11 being out of support, and if we really do need to publish for 4.11, just need confirmation from @kalexand-rh, etc.

@shreyasiddhartha
Copy link
Contributor Author

@shreyasiddhartha Same thing as the other PR I merged for you - let us know if the manual cherry picks also need to be merged by adding the merge-review-needed labels on those.

Same thing about 4.11 being out of support, and if we really do need to publish for 4.11, just need confirmation from @kalexand-rh, etc.

Thanks @bergerhoffer! I would also like to know if we're not updating 4.11. Will refrain from working on it in future. :)

@bergerhoffer
Copy link
Contributor

@shreyasiddhartha Yeah, we are not supposed to update 4.11 anymore, unless there is an exception to. If there is a z-stream release, that does seem like a valid reason. But I'm not positive, so that's where I'd like a DPM confirmation :)

@shreyasiddhartha
Copy link
Contributor Author

shreyasiddhartha commented Mar 28, 2024 •
edited

@shreyasiddhartha Yeah, we are not supposed to update 4.11 anymore, unless there is an exception to. If there is a z-stream release, that does seem like a valid reason. But I'm not positive, so that's where I'd like a DPM confirmation :)

@bergerhoffer I have added the merge review needed labels to 4.13 and 4.12 PRs. Can you please help with it? :) Thanks for your help.

@briandooley just confirmed that I can skip 4.11.

@bergerhoffer
Copy link
Contributor

@bergerhoffer I have added the merge review needed labels to 4.13 and 4.12 PRs. Can you please help with it? :) Thanks for your help.

On it!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@periklis periklis periklis left review comments

@bergerhoffer bergerhoffer bergerhoffer left review comments

@mletalie mletalie mletalie left review comments

Assignees

@mletalie mletalie

Labels
branch/enterprise-4.12 branch/enterprise-4.13 branch/enterprise-4.14 merge-review-in-progress Signifies that the merge review team is reviewing this PR merge-review-needed Signifies that the merge review team needs to review this PR peer-review-done Signifies that the peer review team has reviewed this PR size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
Continuous Release
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet
6 participants
@shreyasiddhartha @ocpdocs-previewbot @anpingli @mletalie @bergerhoffer @periklis