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

Release 5.3 - August 2022 #15685

Closed
6 tasks
ckolli5 opened this issue Jun 15, 2022 · 29 comments
Closed
6 tasks

Release 5.3 - August 2022 #15685

ckolli5 opened this issue Jun 15, 2022 · 29 comments
Labels
P1 I'll work on this now. (Assignee required) release team-OSS Issues for the Bazel OSS team: installation, release processBazel packaging, website type: process

Comments

@ckolli5
Copy link

ckolli5 commented Jun 15, 2022

Status of Bazel 5.3

To report a release-blocking bug, please add a comment with the text @bazel-io flag to the issue. A release manager will triage it and add it to the milestone.

To cherry-pick a mainline commit into 5.3, simply send a PR against the release-5.3.0 branch.

Task list:

@ckolli5 ckolli5 added P1 I'll work on this now. (Assignee required) type: process release team-OSS Issues for the Bazel OSS team: installation, release processBazel packaging, website labels Jun 15, 2022
@ckolli5 ckolli5 pinned this issue Jun 15, 2022
@wisechengyi
Copy link
Contributor

Hello 👋 general question on release cadence - #15682 is a bug in 5.2.0. Should it be picked into a 5.2.x patch release, or is 5.3.0 is the patch release? Just wanted to make sure whichever release it lands only contains the bug fixes, and no new development.

@ananta-code
Copy link

Hello - there is a ticket #15762 .Are you also planning to pick it for the next patch release

@ckolli5
Copy link
Author

ckolli5 commented Jul 21, 2022

Hello 👋 general question on release cadence - #15682 is a bug in 5.2.0. Should it be picked into a 5.2.x patch release, or is 5.3.0 is the patch release? Just wanted to make sure whichever release it lands only contains the bug fixes, and no new development.

@wisechengyi We have already cherry picked the fix that is addressing this issue to release-5.3.0. At this point we are not planing to perform any patch release.

@ckolli5
Copy link
Author

ckolli5 commented Jul 21, 2022

Hello - there is a ticket #15762 .Are you also planning to pick it for the next patch release

@ananta-code Since we are not planing for any patch release at this point, this will be cherry picked to release-5.3.0.

@sluongng
Copy link
Contributor

I was wondering if a change like d7f0724 would be considered too disruptive have left for Bazel 6.x or if it's ok to be considered for 5.3?

cc: @wilwell

@sluongng
Copy link
Contributor

sluongng commented Jul 25, 2022

Context: we recently run into an issue where we have a lot of rules_docker actions that zip/tar large blobs of container images. These actions can be quite expensive in memory consumption and require fine tuning to avoid they all run in parallel together, which trigger kernel's OOM killer.

Having resource_set in 5.3 would allow us to do exactly that.


Edit: created #15968 to discuss this

Edit2: it seems like the change was included as part of this squashed commit 78af34f

Sorry for the noise, thanks for the amazing work 🙇‍♂️

@ShreeM01
Copy link
Contributor

Hello all, we have decided to push the release date to 08/15/2022. Just wanted to keep you all updated. Thanks!

@AustinSchuh
Copy link
Contributor

Ran 5.3 RC1 on our build against our remote execution cluster and it fails to run tests. #16003 is the bug I filed. This is a regression from 5.0, which worked with the exact same version of the code being built and the exact same command.

@UebelAndre
Copy link
Contributor

Hello, would it be possible to cherry-pick 9c98120 (#15130) for 5.3?

@ShreeM01
Copy link
Contributor

ShreeM01 commented Aug 4, 2022

Ran 5.3 RC1 on our build against our remote execution cluster and it fails to run tests. #16003 is the bug I filed. This is a regression from 5.0, which worked with the exact same version of the code being built and the exact same command.

Hi @AustinSchuh, we are awaiting review on 16008 which fixes the issue.

@ShreeM01
Copy link
Contributor

Ran 5.3 RC1 on our build against our remote execution cluster and it fails to run tests. #16003 is the bug I filed. This is a regression from 5.0, which worked with the exact same version of the code being built and the exact same command.

Ran 5.3 RC1 on our build against our remote execution cluster and it fails to run tests. #16003 is the bug I filed. This is a regression from 5.0, which worked with the exact same version of the code being built and the exact same command.

Hi @AustinSchuh, we are awaiting review on 16008 which fixes the issue.

Ran 5.3 RC1 on our build against our remote execution cluster and it fails to run tests. #16003 is the bug I filed. This is a regression from 5.0, which worked with the exact same version of the code being built and the exact same command.

Hi @AustinSchuh, we are awaiting review on 16008 which fixes the issue.

Hello @AustinSchuh! Just an update, as 16008 fixes the issue, it has been reviewed and merged to release 5.3.0. Thanks!

@nresare
Copy link
Contributor

nresare commented Aug 12, 2022

I would like to put forward #16095 a trivial change to add support for java language level 17 to the linux-aarch64 platform

@ShreeM01
Copy link
Contributor

I would like to put forward #16095 a trivial change to add support for java language level 17 to the linux-aarch64 platform

Hello @nresare, Just to let you know it is not possible for this release-5.3.0. We can pick it in next release. Thanks!

@dws
Copy link
Contributor

dws commented Aug 16, 2022

Will there be a 5.3.0rc2 before the final release?

@ShreeM01
Copy link
Contributor

Will there be a 5.3.0rc2 before the final release?

Hi @dws! yes, we are going to announce 5.3.0rc2 before the final release. Thanks!

@nresare
Copy link
Contributor

nresare commented Aug 17, 2022

I would like to put forward #16095 a trivial change to add support for java language level 17 to the linux-aarch64 platform

Hello @nresare, Just to let you know it is not possible for this release-5.3.0. We can pick it in next release. Thanks!

I see. Is there a branch cut for this next release, to open PRs against?

@ShreeM01
Copy link
Contributor

I would like to put forward #16095 a trivial change to add support for java language level 17 to the linux-aarch64 platform

Hello @nresare, Just to let you know it is not possible for this release-5.3.0. We can pick it in next release. Thanks!

I see. Is there a branch cut for this next release, to open PRs against?

Hi @nresare! Not as of yet, we will be cutting the branch for next release after this release. Thanks!

@ShreeM01
Copy link
Contributor

5.3 is now out!

@petemounce @excitoon @vbatts Could you please update relevant package managers? Thanks!

@dan-cohn-sabre
Copy link

Hello - there is a ticket #15762 .Are you also planning to pick it for the next patch release

@ananta-code Since we are not planing for any patch release at this point, this will be cherry picked to release-5.3.0.

@ckolli5 I don't see this listed in the 5.3 release notes. Can you confirm the fix has been included? Both #15762 and #15865 are still open.

@fmeum
Copy link
Collaborator

fmeum commented Aug 23, 2022

#16008 (comment) is a first report of a 5.3.0 regression my fix for #16003 introduced - the existing tests didn't cover local execution.

@ShreeM01
Copy link
Contributor

Hello - there is a ticket #15762 .Are you also planning to pick it for the next patch release

@ananta-code Since we are not planing for any patch release at this point, this will be cherry picked to release-5.3.0.

@ckolli5 I don't see this listed in the 5.3 release notes. Can you confirm the fix has been included? Both #15762 and #15865 are still open.

Hi @dan-cohn-sabre! As we are working on it, we will keep you updated of any progress. Thanks!

@ShreeM01
Copy link
Contributor

ShreeM01 commented Sep 7, 2022

Hello - there is a ticket #15762 .Are you also planning to pick it for the next patch release

Hi @ananta-code ! As this issue is marked as P3, we don't have any resource to work on this. Please feel free to send PR. Thanks!

@ShreeM01
Copy link
Contributor

5.3.1 is now out!

@vbatts @petemounce @excitoon Could you please update relevant package managers? Thanks!

@petemounce
Copy link
Contributor

Done, both; apologies for delay.

@kshyanashree - who can I talk to to integrate the chocolatey build & push into bazel CI? It requires:

  • a windows CI node (which I believe isn't a problem nowadays)

  • a person inside the bazel team to have access to the chocolatey bazel profile

  • that person to create and securely save a chocolatey API key for use within CI

  • that person to teach said windows CI node where to acquire said API key from secure storage

  • a tiny trivial CI job which runs after the release has been pushed to github that does

    # {inside a bazelbuild/bazel clone's checkout}
    cd "scripts/packaging/chocolatey"
    ./build.ps1 -version "VERSION" -mode "release"
    choco push

@Wyverald
Copy link
Member

Wyverald commented Oct 4, 2022

@meteorcloudy FYI, we could maybe look into this

@meteorcloudy
Copy link
Member

@petemounce Thanks! I filed an issue to track this: bazelbuild/continuous-integration#1456

@ShreeM01
Copy link
Contributor

5.3.2 is now out!

@petemounce @excitoon @vbatts Could you please update relevant package managers? Thanks!

@petemounce
Copy link
Contributor

Done. Ping on bazelbuild/continuous-integration#1456

@Wyverald Wyverald unpinned this issue Oct 27, 2022
@ananta-code
Copy link

#15762

Hi ,
I can see #15762 is showing as closed but #15865 is still open .
Could you please check?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
P1 I'll work on this now. (Assignee required) release team-OSS Issues for the Bazel OSS team: installation, release processBazel packaging, website type: process
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests