Skip to content

Conversation

@michael-valdron
Copy link
Member

Description of Changes

Cuts new stack version for Go stack that provides 1.24 Go version.

Related Issue(s)

Acceptance Criteria

  • Contributing guide

Have you read the devfile registry contributing guide and followed its instructions?

  • Test automation

Does this repository's tests pass with your changes?

  • Documentation

Does any documentation need to be updated with your changes?

  • Check Tools Provider

Have you tested the changes with existing tools, i.e. Odo, Che, Console? (See devfile registry contributing guide on how to test changes)

Tests Performed

Explain what tests you personally ran to ensure the changes are functioning as expected.

How To Test

Instructions for the reviewer on how to test your changes.

Notes To Reviewer

Any notes you would like to include for the reviewer.

@michael-valdron michael-valdron requested review from a team as code owners July 9, 2025 19:22
@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot requested review from elsony and thepetk July 9, 2025 19:22
@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the approved label Jul 9, 2025
Copy link
Contributor

@thepetk thepetk left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

lgtm, one question I have is about the 2.x version. Will it be covered by another PR? I don't think the failures of CI are related with the changes of the PR

Also not-related but should we start thinking about deprecating the older versions of this stack?

@thepetk
Copy link
Contributor

thepetk commented Jul 10, 2025

lgtm, one question I have is about the 2.x version. Will it be covered by another PR? I don't think the failures of CI are related with the changes of the PR

Also not-related but should we start thinking about deprecating the older versions of this stack?

@michael-valdron ignore my comment for 2.x just noticed #622

@michael-valdron
Copy link
Member Author

michael-valdron commented Jul 10, 2025

Also not-related but should we start thinking about deprecating the older versions of this stack?

Yes, think we should both start deprecating stack version across our owned stacks and pinning the starter project references for each stack version so starter project changes don't break the stack.

FYI @devfile/devfile-services-team

@michael-valdron
Copy link
Member Author

Hi @devfile/che-team, need a review from one of you 👀

@thepetk
Copy link
Contributor

thepetk commented Jul 24, 2025

/retest

Copy link
Collaborator

@svor svor left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

lgtm
screenshot-catalog_demo_redhat_com-2025_07_24-13_19_07

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the lgtm Looks good to me label Jul 24, 2025
@michael-valdron
Copy link
Member Author

@thepetk looks good?

Copy link
Contributor

@thepetk thepetk left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

/lgtm

@openshift-ci
Copy link

openshift-ci bot commented Jul 24, 2025

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: michael-valdron, svor, thepetk

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Details Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
  • OWNERS [michael-valdron,thepetk]

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@michael-valdron michael-valdron merged commit bea3a02 into devfile:main Jul 24, 2025
13 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

approved lgtm Looks good to me

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants