Stable 4.5 to 4.6 #585
Merged
Stable 4.5 to 4.6 #585
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
openshift-ci-robot
added
the
approved
Member
Author
|
/hold |
openshift-ci-robot
added
the
do-not-merge/hold
sdodson
force-pushed
the
stable-4.5-to-4.6
branch
from
c3a11c8 to
1fb8768
Compare
Member
Author
|
/hold cancel |
openshift-ci-robot
removed
the
do-not-merge/hold
Contributor
|
/lgtm |
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: jottofar, sdodson The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. The pull request process is described here DetailsNeeds approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
wking
added a commit
to wking/cincinnati-graph-data
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 16, 2021
Like 1fb8768 (Add 4.5 to 4.6 upgrades to stable-4.6, 2020-12-14, openshift#585). Id forgotten to drop 4.6.20 (and its edge to 4.7.1) from stable-4.7 when rebasing 55830fd (Enable 4.6.20 in stable and EUS channel(s), 2021-03-03, openshift#675), but we're happy with the 4.6->4.7 stability, and ready to put the rest of these in stable-4.7 anyway.
wking
added a commit
to wking/cincinnati-graph-data
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 30, 2021
Like 1fb8768 (Add 4.5 to 4.6 upgrades to stable-4.6, 2020-12-14, openshift#585). Id forgotten to drop 4.6.20 (and its edge to 4.7.1) from stable-4.7 when rebasing 55830fd (Enable 4.6.20 in stable and EUS channel(s), 2021-03-03, openshift#675), but we're happy with the 4.6->4.7 stability, and ready to put the rest of these in stable-4.7 anyway.
wking
added a commit
to wking/cincinnati-graph-data
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 1, 2021
These were supposed to be tombstoned in candidate based on recycled errata [1,2]. But they snuck into fast-4.6 with afa003f (Populate 4.5.z into candidate-4.6 and fast-4.6, 2020-11-05, openshift#526). And then I moved them from there into fast-4.5 with 1d9fe0f (channels: More backfilling (e.g. 4.3.0 in candidate-4.4), 2020-11-12, openshift#549). And they went into stable-4.6 with 1fb8768 (Add 4.5 to 4.6 upgrades to stable-4.6, 2020-12-14, openshift#585). This commit completes their accidental journey, since tombstoning them in fast would violate [3]: While the fast-4.5 channel contains releases as soon as their errata are published, releases are added to the stable-4.5 channel after a delay [1]: openshift#438 (comment) [2]: openshift#456 (comment) [3]: https://docs.openshift.com/container-platform/4.5/updating/updating-cluster-between-minor.html#stable-4-5-channel
wking
added a commit
to wking/cincinnati-graph-data
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 13, 2021
These were supposed to be tombstoned in candidate based on recycled errata [1,2]. But they snuck into fast-4.6 with afa003f (Populate 4.5.z into candidate-4.6 and fast-4.6, 2020-11-05, openshift#526). And then I moved them from there into fast-4.5 with 1d9fe0f (channels: More backfilling (e.g. 4.3.0 in candidate-4.4), 2020-11-12, openshift#549). And they went into stable-4.6 with 1fb8768 (Add 4.5 to 4.6 upgrades to stable-4.6, 2020-12-14, openshift#585). This commit completes their accidental journey, since tombstoning them in fast would violate [3]: While the fast-4.5 channel contains releases as soon as their errata are published, releases are added to the stable-4.5 channel after a delay [1]: openshift#438 (comment) [2]: openshift#456 (comment) [3]: https://docs.openshift.com/container-platform/4.5/updating/updating-cluster-between-minor.html#stable-4-5-channel
wking
added a commit
to wking/cincinnati-graph-data
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 17, 2021
These were supposed to be tombstoned in candidate based on recycled errata [1,2]. But they snuck into fast-4.6 with afa003f (Populate 4.5.z into candidate-4.6 and fast-4.6, 2020-11-05, openshift#526). And then I moved them from there into fast-4.5 with 1d9fe0f (channels: More backfilling (e.g. 4.3.0 in candidate-4.4), 2020-11-12, openshift#549). And they went into stable-4.6 with 1fb8768 (Add 4.5 to 4.6 upgrades to stable-4.6, 2020-12-14, openshift#585). This commit completes their accidental journey, since tombstoning them in fast would violate [3]: While the fast-4.5 channel contains releases as soon as their errata are published, releases are added to the stable-4.5 channel after a delay [1]: openshift#438 (comment) [2]: openshift#456 (comment) [3]: https://docs.openshift.com/container-platform/4.5/updating/updating-cluster-between-minor.html#stable-4-5-channel
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
4 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Merge after #581