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

Add release workflow for this project #215

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jul 17, 2024

Conversation

rapphil
Copy link
Collaborator

@rapphil rapphil commented Jul 17, 2024

Issue #, if available: #214

Description of changes:

  • Add workflow that is triggered after merging to main or to any of the releases branches. This workflow will publish the built image to a staging area (private ECR repository).
  • Add workflow for releasing the staged image to private ecr.
  • Add simple integration tests that tries to list buckets in s3 through the proxy.
  • Add details about how to release new versions.

By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache 2.0 license.

To release a new version of the aws-sigv4-proxy, please follow these steps:

1. Create a release branch for this minor version series, if one does not exist yet. The convention is to name this branch: `release/v<release series>` where release series has the format `<major version>.<minor version>.x`. Example of branch `release/v1.8.x`
2. From the release branch, update the content of the `VERSION` file in the root of this repository. The convention is to ommit the patch version if that is in 0. Example of content: `1.8` or `1.8.1`. Merge the PR that updates the `VERSION` file. Confirm that the continuous integration workflow will succeed.

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Is this correct? I'd expect the patch component to always be included. It's common to publish image tags that only have the major and minor that always refer to the latest patch version and I would be surprised if 1.8 always pointed to 1.8.0 if 1.8.1 had been released.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This is just to handle the current state of things. Right now tags and images were created without the patch number.
do you think it is worth changing this pattern moving forward? I don't see any harm in doing that but do you see any risk?

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Consistency is probably more important than aligning with my particular version of correctness here, so definitely keep doing what has been done before for now. I'm not sure whether it's worth making a change moving forward, but if you do communication of the change will be important to avoid surprises.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Created this issue #216 in case we want to change that in the future.

@rapphil rapphil merged commit d8d62f2 into master Jul 17, 2024
2 checks passed
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.

2 participants