v1.0 discussion

[mikebrow]

Given that many of us are building products based on runc and also given that we need to be able to rely on stable releases of runc and further given that the v1.0 runtime specifications are long since approved...

Can we start a discussion here or is there one happening somewhere already about what issues/prs are required to push runc over the hump and get v1.0 ga out the door?

List of PRs to be considered as necessary for GA:
#1562

[wking]

The 1.0.0 milestone is probably a good starting point.

[mikebrow]

@wking with the exception of 1562 they seem pretty stale. Let's gather some comments here and pony up a discussion on the next oci call.

[crosbymichael]

I think its about time that we release this to give packages something to package. Changes will come but we can handle that with proper versioning and backports.

[cyphar]

I think we should sit down and make up a list of patches that we want to include in 1.0, and then do a code freeze for 1.0. But personally I think we should be far more frequent with version bumps (the amount of changes between 1.0.0-rc3 and 1.0.0-rc4 and HEAD are insane).

[crosbymichael]

@cyphar no one to blame but ourselves for not being more frequent ;)

[bmcustodio]

+1 for a release, even if 1.0.0-rc5. The current RC is missing some pretty important fixes. :)

[pires]

+100 🙏 right now, we are in desperate need for #1698 or otherwise we'll have to ship our own build - we'd feel way more comfortable shipping an official release.

[caniszczyk]

@opencontainers/runc-maintainers when are we up for a new release? also any rough idea on a v1.0 date would be good, I'd like to do a blog post on it with quotes from maintainers :)

[crosbymichael]

@cyphar do you want to do an rc5 this week and then we can come up with a 1.0 release date to follow 1-2 weeks later?

[mrunalp]

@crosbymichael That sounds good to me.

[crosbymichael]

I only asked @cyphar if we could do it since he has been release manager extraordinaire this whole time ;) If you are too busy another one of us could give it a try as well.

[mrunalp]

@crosbymichael Heh, no worries :)

[cyphar]

@crosbymichael Alright, I can send out all the stuff for a new release over the weekend. I'm currently on vacation, so I would recommend that we wait at least until I'm back (on the 3rd of March) before we iron out what is needed for GA.

[cyphar]

#1739 is the release PR for 1.0.0-rc5, and I've already sent a notification out to the ML.

[cyphar]

The plan is to push a "fuck it, do it live" 1.0 release branch this week with voting done by next week. After that we're going to have releases every 2 months or so, to get into the grove of actually doing regular releases.

[caniszczyk]

SGTM

…

On Tue, Nov 13, 2018 at 3:03 PM Aleksa Sarai ***@***.***> wrote: The plan is to push a "fuck it, do it live" 1.0 release branch this week with voting done by next week. After that we're going to have releases every 2 months or so, to get into the grove of actually doing regular releases. — You are receiving this because you are on a team that was mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#1709 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAD5ITHLkNFcgY0wdbK3tKWU3y-yw_1wks5uum6sgaJpZM4Ryetu> .

-- Cheers, Chris Aniszczyk http://aniszczyk.org +1 512 961 6719

[cyphar]

I'm closing this in favour of #1905.