Skip to content

Conversation

@HannesWell
Copy link
Member

As described in #2550 (comment) ff running the prepareRelease workflow and submitting the automatically created changes in the eclipse-platform-parent/pom.xml before the milestones are created and thus the updateRelease workflow is triggered in all SDK repos, will ensure that in the parent-version update PR created in the other repos the project versions can already be bumped by the automatic version bump workflow. With that all release preparation changes necessary in the other repos are created automatically and one just has to review the PRs and submit it.

name: Prepare Next Release
on:
milestone:
types: [created]
Copy link
Contributor

@laeubi laeubi Nov 25, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I don't see how running the workflow manually helps in any way, the whole purpose of this is to automate the process, e.g. exactly this manually run was performed before (but not with an action).

If one want some "timed" process, then better the process to create the milestones should be adjusted, for example one can create first the milestones in the aggregator, then this workflow runs and this can then trigger the creation of the milestones in other repositories.

If one wants, it would even work to create the (release) milestone manually in this repository using Github UI first.

Copy link
Member Author

@HannesWell HannesWell Nov 25, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

If one want some "timed" process, then better the process to create the milestones should be adjusted, for example one can create first the milestones in the aggregator, then this workflow runs and this can then trigger the creation of the milestones in other repositories.

It is to better time the action plus to set the baseline earlier, which saves all the manual version bumps!
I the job that creates the milestones is hidden for me, but I assume it currently creates the milestones for all repos at once. I don't see how it is simple to enter all the milestone data twice with all the dates for M1, M2, M3, RC1, RC1 and GA plus the names instead of running one GH workflow with three inputs in advance.

If one wants, it would even work to create the (release) milestone manually in this repository using Github UI first.

That would again be a manual process that has also three input parameters and is more fragile. And the baseline would have to be set manually again. So it would actually be more complicated than this proposal.

On the long run I think the goal should be any ways that all the release preparation work is done or triggered in one job that considers most of the tedious and fixed steps and has also all the required timings/orders recorded (e.g. waits until a specific PR is submitted if necessary). So I see this as an intermediate solution anyways.
Depending where such a job will reside, Jenkins or GH (and the the most inpact on the answer has probably the question were we want to store tokens that have access to all repos), this job might also be called from a Jenkins job using the GH REST API.

@HannesWell
Copy link
Member Author

With #3078 this is obsolete and can be discarded.

@HannesWell HannesWell closed this Jun 22, 2025
@HannesWell HannesWell deleted the enhance-prepareRelease-workflow branch June 22, 2025 19:09
@HannesWell
Copy link
Member Author

If one wants, it would even work to create the (release) milestone manually in this repository using Github UI first.

In general it still would be nice to have the release calendar (not only the milestone) a better accessible format/location than currently the google calendar. Then it would be easier to derive the milestone dates in the release preparation Jenkins pipeline automatically. Maybe we can export the calendar to a file into this git repo and read it in the release preparation workflow and also the freeze check (which currently relies on an internal API).
But we can discuss this separately later.

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