You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I've also found the current branch/tag/versioning approach confusing when upgrading versions, since I never know whether to use the example Calico/CNI manifests from master, a version branch, or the git tag. If I pick the wrong one, then there's the risk of missing fixes due to the inconsistency mentioned above.
Would it be possible to:
change branch usage so that there's only one branch per minor release (eg release-1.5.x instead of release-1.5.1, release-1.5.2) -- since the branches are mostly redundant given the version tags
add automation/process to ensure that master is kept in sync with the release-1.N.x branches -- or else come up with a way that means the duplication between them isn't required? (eg all development happens on master, apart from specific cherry-pick branches; then version tags are used as the canonical way to refer to a release).
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Hi @edmorley! Thanks for raising this issue. It's something we're keenly aware of and we acknowledge the existing state of affairs is far from optimal.
We are currently having a discussion internally on how to reduce the duplication of configuration files (not just for the CNI repo) between the source project repo and the eks-charts repo. We've also discussed (specifically in regards to this CNI repo) getting rid of the versioned config directories (e.g. config/v1.5 and instead having a single config/ directory containing the configuration files and using git (properly) where the configuration files in the config/ directory will be for the specific git tag/branch.
Hi!
There have been several occasions when fixes have been applied to one branch but not others:
I've also found the current branch/tag/versioning approach confusing when upgrading versions, since I never know whether to use the example Calico/CNI manifests from
master
, a version branch, or the git tag. If I pick the wrong one, then there's the risk of missing fixes due to the inconsistency mentioned above.Would it be possible to:
release-1.5.x
instead ofrelease-1.5.1
,release-1.5.2
) -- since the branches are mostly redundant given the version tagsmaster
is kept in sync with therelease-1.N.x
branches -- or else come up with a way that means the duplication between them isn't required? (eg all development happens on master, apart from specific cherry-pick branches; then version tags are used as the canonical way to refer to a release).The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: