OK, I will send v2 today (I may also reintroduce 1.1.1) On Mon, Dec 12, 2022, 1:48 PM William Lallemand <wlallem...@haproxy.com> wrote:
> Hi Ilya ! > > On Mon, Dec 12, 2022 at 10:56:11AM +0500, Илья Шипицин wrote: > > hello, > > > > I made some prototype of I meant: > > > > > https://github.com/chipitsine/haproxy/commit/c95955ecfd1a5b514c235b0f155bfa71178b51d5 > > > > - We don't often use "dev" in our branches so we should build everything > when it's not a stable branch. > > - We don't want to build "3.0" OR latest, in fact we only need to > condition the "latest" build, because the other one will always be > built. > > So once the "3.1" is released we could add an entry for it to > the file and "latest" will be another version. This way we could > backport the "3.1" in previous branches if we want to support it. > > > I;m not sure how stable branches are named in private github ci. If you > can > > enlighten me, I'll try to adopt. > > currently, I did the following, if branch name is either master or > contains > > "dev", so "latest" semantic is chosen, fixed versions are used otherwise. > > > > The stable branches are named "haproxy-X.Y", so in my opinion we should > build the "latest" for anything which is not a stable branch. > > > also, I know that the same ci is used for > > > > https://github.com/haproxytech/quic-dev > > > > > > @Frederic Lecaille <flecai...@haproxy.com> , which behaviour would you > like > > for that repo ? what is branch naming convention ? > > > The same as the master branch IMHO. > > Also, the problem is uglier than I thought, we are not testing 1.1.1 > anymore since "ubuntu-latest" was upgraded to 22.04 a few weeks ago > without us noticing. "ssl=stock" is now a 3.0 branch. It brokes all > stable branches below 2.6 because they need the deprecated SSL API. > I changed "ubuntu-latest" to "ubuntu-20.04" for those branches so it > works as earlier. I'm going to reintroduce "1.1.1" for master to 2.6 so > it is correctly tested again. > > In my opinion we need a similar mecanism for the distribution than for > the ssl libs. Maybe using "latest" only in dev branches and a fixed > version for stable branches will be enough. > > Regards, > > -- > William Lallemand >
