Re: [PATCH 0/2] Rework deployment of image artifacts

[Zhihang Wei <wzh@ilbers.de>]

On 4/16/26 18:01, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> On 16.04.26 17:51, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> On 16.04.26 17:42, Zhihang Wei wrote:
>>> Applied to next, thanks.
>>>
>> I am repeating myself: We broken the deployment API in v1.0. This series
>> is breaking it once more, just differently (and rather unhandy for many
>> downstream users).
>>
>> Are we truly sure now that this is the FINAL solution, or do we plan for
>> n more API breakages?
>>
> But let's a assume we keep it like this:
>
> What is the plan for a v1.0.1 hotfix release? I'm seeing other patches
> being merged. Some would qualify to be part as well, another one is
> harmless but not a hotfix. So I'm asking before things possibly move on
> further. At least some users here are waiting to adopt v1.0.x.
>
> Jan
>
We have tested the prefixed DTB approach on our downstreams and it
works without major issues.

Regarding splitting TMPDIRs: this would break at least one of our
downstreams. We have a setup with two multiconfigs — one for rescue
(with its own rootfs, kernel, etc.) and another regular one which
depends on the rescue one and needs to consume its deployed artifacts.
Splitting TMPDIRs is not viable in this case.


As for the release plan: we would like to target v1.1 rather than a
v1.0.1 hotfix, with the API expected to remain stable for some period.
I propose that if a final solution can be found quickly, we hold v1.1
until it is merged. Otherwise, v1.1 should be based on the prefixed DTB
patch.

We do have a new proposal for the "final solution". Let me send it
under v6 DTB discussion.

Zhihang

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "isar-users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to isar-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/isar-users/86216acd-0b35-4f11-803a-c5ac439de993%40ilbers.de.