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

[epic] v1.0.0 Proposed release blockers #950

Closed
26 tasks done
joelanford opened this issue Jun 17, 2024 · 5 comments
Closed
26 tasks done

[epic] v1.0.0 Proposed release blockers #950

joelanford opened this issue Jun 17, 2024 · 5 comments
Labels
bug/release-blocker issue identified as something which should be solved before we can release a new version epic v1.0 Issues related to the initial stable release of OLMv1

Comments

@joelanford
Copy link
Member

joelanford commented Jun 17, 2024

Approved Release Blockers

Proposed Release Blockers

Non-blockers

Resolved

@joelanford joelanford converted this from a draft issue Jun 17, 2024
@joelanford joelanford added epic v1.0 Issues related to the initial stable release of OLMv1 labels Jun 17, 2024
@joelanford joelanford moved this to Accepted in OLM v1 Jun 17, 2024
@joelanford joelanford changed the title [epic] v1.0.0 Release blockers [epic] v1.0.0 Proposed release blockers Jun 17, 2024
@joelanford joelanford pinned this issue Jun 18, 2024
@grokspawn grokspawn added the bug/release-blocker issue identified as something which should be solved before we can release a new version label Jun 18, 2024
@joelanford
Copy link
Member Author

I took the liberty of moving a few of the release blockers to non-release blockers:

  1. Fix: e2e test for re-reconcile on catalog change is not valid #945 is an e2e test. There is no indication today that the actual behavior related to reconciling ClusterExtensions due to ClusterCatalog changes is incorrect.
  2. The catalogd and operator-controller metrics services target each other #955 does not change end-user facing APIs for functionality. It can be fixed after 1.0.0.
  3. catalogmetadata client adds extreme latency to reconciliation #914 is a performance and UX issue, not an API or functionality change, so we can technically wait until after 1.0.0 to fix it. But I also still think that going out with this as a known issue would be a signal to users that we are unnecessarily rushing 1.0.0.

@tmshort
Copy link
Contributor

tmshort commented Jun 27, 2024

Added #987, #879, #893. #869 as proposed release blockers

@tmshort
Copy link
Contributor

tmshort commented Jun 27, 2024

And added #970 as a proposed release blocker.

@joelanford
Copy link
Member Author

I don't think #869 is a release blocker because it is not a functional or API change. It is an optimization for reducing disk read/write/usage.

@joelanford joelanford moved this from Accepted to Implementing in OLM v1 Jul 2, 2024
@everettraven everettraven unpinned this issue Jul 8, 2024
@everettraven everettraven pinned this issue Jul 8, 2024
@everettraven
Copy link
Contributor

@joelanford Just a heads up that I removed #1088 from this epic to be tracked in the v1 API review epic

@grokspawn grokspawn unpinned this issue Nov 11, 2024
@grokspawn grokspawn moved this from Implementing to Done in OLM v1 Nov 14, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
bug/release-blocker issue identified as something which should be solved before we can release a new version epic v1.0 Issues related to the initial stable release of OLMv1
Projects
Status: Done
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants