Haproxy 3.2.15 upgrade - #40
Conversation
jacquesh
left a comment
jacquesh
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
A bunch of whitespace fiddling that seem unintentional/unnecessary to me and I'm not sure about the change to fetch tags on every activation but the actual version upgrade looks good to me.
… file(s) known to git
…Tried 'v3.2.15' and '3.2.15'
jacquesh
left a comment
jacquesh
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm not 100% convinced that the complexity of handling the missing tags in a bash script is worth it, but happy to go with this as is now that the checks are local-only. Nice!
To facilitate knowledge sharing I'd like to get another maintainer to review this before merging, as previously discussed. I've requested additional reviews accordingly.
| # Use the major.minor series (for example, 3.3) for the upstream repo name. | ||
| # Accept commit tags in form v<major>.<minor>.<patch> or <major>.<minor>.<patch>. | ||
| if [[ "$WEIR_HAPROXY_BASE_COMMIT" =~ ^v?([0-9]+\.[0-9]+)\.[0-9]+$ ]]; then | ||
| WEIR_HAPROXY_SERIES=${BASH_REMATCH[1]} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Not a big thing , in the next change , put both these in one line like echo ""Invalid WEIR_HAPROXY_BASE_COMMIT: $WEIR_HAPROXY_BASE_COMMIT, Expected format: [v].. (for example, v3.3.6 or 3.3.6)". Its much easier to see if we put this whole thng to jenkins
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Also if ur expecting specific versions/inputs , would be nice to have a --help for this bash script. Claude can do it for you . Again this is for next PR, no need for it to be blocker
3 participants
Description
Haproxyupgrade to version 3.2.15githubmirror does not have all the various version tags. Update activate.sh to get the source files from theHaproxyrepo instead of the mirror image fromgithub.Type of Change
Checklist