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

[release/9.0-staging] Backport "Ship CoreCLR packages in servicing releases" #113026

Merged

Conversation

amanasifkhalid
Copy link
Member

@amanasifkhalid amanasifkhalid commented Feb 28, 2025

Backport #113020 to release/9.0-staging

Customer Impact

  • Customer reported
  • Found internally

An attempt to backport #111444 revealed that CoreCLR packages (like ILAsm/ILDasm) aren't published in servicing releases, meaning fixes to these packages aren't reaching customers. As identified in #112710 (comment), there are some non-CoreCLR packages that also aren't being shipped in servicing releases, but probably should be.

Regression

  • Yes
  • No

As far as I know, there was never a conscious decision to stop updating these packages in servicing releases.

Testing

An official build of release/9.0-staging with CoreCLR packages enabled for shipping passed, and I verified in the package manifest that these packages were shipped. Some manual verification that these packages were shipped in the next servicing release would be prudent.

Risk

Low. While this will change the versions of the packages available to customers, I suspect few customers were using these packages to begin with, considering it took us this long to notice this.

@Copilot Copilot bot review requested due to automatic review settings February 28, 2025 22:35

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Copilot reviewed 2 out of 2 changed files in this pull request and generated no comments.

@amanasifkhalid
Copy link
Member Author

amanasifkhalid commented Feb 28, 2025

@jkoritzinsky PTAL, thanks!

I don't know if there are 8.0 fixes to these packages that are waiting to propagate, but should we backport this to 8.0 as well, just for good measure?

Copy link
Contributor

Tagging subscribers to this area: @hoyosjs
See info in area-owners.md if you want to be subscribed.

Copy link
Member

@jeffschwMSFT jeffschwMSFT left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

lgtm. please get a code review. we will take for consideration in 9.0.x

@jeffschwMSFT jeffschwMSFT added the Servicing-consider Issue for next servicing release review label Feb 28, 2025
@jeffschwMSFT jeffschwMSFT added this to the 9.0.x milestone Feb 28, 2025
Copy link
Member

@ericstj ericstj left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM - do we need to do an official build of this in servicing to ensure it does the right thing? -- never mind I see that was done. Thank you!

@rbhanda rbhanda modified the milestones: 9.0.x, 9.0.4 Mar 4, 2025
@rbhanda rbhanda added Servicing-approved Approved for servicing release and removed Servicing-consider Issue for next servicing release review labels Mar 4, 2025
@amanasifkhalid amanasifkhalid merged commit f18ca7d into dotnet:release/9.0-staging Mar 4, 2025
96 of 99 checks passed
@amanasifkhalid amanasifkhalid deleted the backport-113020 branch March 4, 2025 18:26
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
Status: Done
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants