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

Enable automatic backporting for linux kernel packages #83

Open
Vincinator opened this issue Feb 18, 2025 · 1 comment · May be fixed by #84
Open

Enable automatic backporting for linux kernel packages #83

Vincinator opened this issue Feb 18, 2025 · 1 comment · May be fixed by #84
Assignees
Milestone

Comments

@Vincinator
Copy link
Contributor

Vincinator commented Feb 18, 2025

What would you like to be added:

Automatically start backport builds where possible.

Why is this needed:

🚧 dumped all the input into this ticket, need to clean this issue and make it more concise later 🚧

We have rel-XXX branches where XXX is the major version of a supported Garden Linux version.
This branch currently pulls in changes from a maint-X.Y or main branch where X.Y is the kernel version used, in case main is on something newer already.

Currently the workflow looks like this:

  1. upgrade maint-X.Y branch with latest patch level (semi automated already, but requires manual fixing)
  2. (only for first backport for XXX) create rel-XXX branch and add .container file with correct build container
  3. merge maint-X.Y to rel-XXX

If Maintainer does not merge changes from main-X.Y, we can potentially diverge from the expected source in maint-X.Y, which may lead in missing fixes or patches.

To Remove this source of issue, we propose to add a definition in maint-6.6 to tell the pipelines for what versions the kernel must be build with which container (previously specified in .container).

To allow maintainers to browser git history, and to be consistent with all other packages, the rel- branches must still exist but must be updated by automation.

@Vincinator Vincinator linked a pull request Feb 18, 2025 that will close this issue
@Vincinator
Copy link
Contributor Author

Automate backport merge #84 is one possible solution. need to test in a fork.

@Vincinator Vincinator self-assigned this Feb 19, 2025
@pnpavlov pnpavlov added this to the 2025-03 milestone Feb 27, 2025
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 a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants