Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
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
docs: Attempt to flesh out the different release responsibilities #20851
docs: Attempt to flesh out the different release responsibilities #20851
Changes from 5 commits
71a5d41
257b3a3
a887c45
32aeb51
34f3d3f
58837c9
1db0a72
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
do we want to link to the docs here? is there anything private in the doc?
AFIK the release manager generally responsible for doing backports for releases.
Also somewhere maybe we should outline all the responsibilities for the role? Right now they're docced up here https://docs.google.com/document/d/1AnIqmJlGlN0nZaxDme2uMjcO9VJxIokGDMYsq2IZM98/edit but we could fold the content in here and delete that doc?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Oh, I didn't realize that doc existed. I added a link to it. But I'd be happy to inline it here, if you think that would be better?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
yeah I think inlining would be better but you're already voluntering for enough improvements so your call :-)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Will do! But I'll do it in a follow up so as not to drag this PR out any longer.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
cc @phlax I assume we should update links to version-specific links in this step right?
Ryan maybe link to one of @phlax recent PRs for an example?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
no - not here - this branch wants to keep links to its own version - we only update the
ref:
links after a releasein the case of a release from
main
(described as "major release" here) we want to update theref:
links for thev1.X.Y.rst
files after the release has happenedthis is because
main
is now on a new (pending) version so the just released version has now become historical - any future branches will also carry the updatedref:
sto use a concrete example - at the point of just happened
v1.22.0
:current.rst
has links with no version prefixv1.22.0
is now historical so all links need to be updated onmain
release/v1.22
branch (and patches cut from it) the links from allv1.22.x.rst
files will always not have the link prefix as the version is contemporaneousThere was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@phlax Can you suggest text to be added here?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
i think the text here is fine - its below that we need to update....
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
lets just remove this - its not quite correct, and is about to be obsolete
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Done!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
this should work for now - there is another step required to sync inventories and use a local copy - but some missing railway track for that
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
lets not worry about this for now and i will either try to automate or add relevant docs
if we dont resolve this, it will cause issues down the road, and has mostly been forgotten, so ill try to prioritize automating this update, or making it unnecessary