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

Jump to bottom

kube3d: 3.0.2 -> 3.1.0 -> 3.1.1 -> 3.1.2 -> 3.1.3 -> 3.1.4 -> 3.1.5 #99725

Merged
merged 8 commits into from Nov 3, 2020
Merged

kube3d: 3.0.2 -> 3.1.0 -> 3.1.1 -> 3.1.2 -> 3.1.3 -> 3.1.4 -> 3.1.5 #99725

merged 8 commits into from Nov 3, 2020

Conversation

06kellyjac
Copy link
Member

@06kellyjac 06kellyjac commented Oct 6, 2020 •
edited

Motivation for this change

Bump kube3d/k3d to 3.1.0 3.1.1 3.1.2 3.1.3 3.1.4 3.1.5

Things done

Updated version, k3s version, and src sha256
I matched the k3s version to the one output by the GH release binary, hopefully that's correct.

@kuznero @jlesquembre @ngerstle

  • Tested using sandboxing (nix.useSandbox on NixOS, or option sandbox in nix.conf on non-NixOS linux)
  • Built on platform(s)
    • NixOS (x86_64)
    • macOS
    • other Linux distributions
  • Tested via one or more NixOS test(s) if existing and applicable for the change (look inside nixos/tests)
  • Tested compilation of all pkgs that depend on this change using nix-shell -p nixpkgs-review --run "nixpkgs-review wip"
  • Tested execution of all binary files (usually in ./result/bin/)
  • Determined the impact on package closure size (by running nix path-info -S before and after)
  • Ensured that relevant documentation is up to date
  • Fits CONTRIBUTING.md.

@06kellyjac 06kellyjac changed the title kube3d: 3.0.2 -> 3.1.0 kube3d: 3.0.2 -> 3.1.0 -> 3.1.1 Oct 7, 2020
@06kellyjac 06kellyjac changed the title kube3d: 3.0.2 -> 3.1.0 -> 3.1.1 kube3d: 3.0.2 -> 3.1.0 -> 3.1.1 -> 3.1.2 Oct 7, 2020
@06kellyjac 06kellyjac changed the title kube3d: 3.0.2 -> 3.1.0 -> 3.1.1 -> 3.1.2 kube3d: 3.0.2 -> 3.1.0 -> 3.1.1 -> 3.1.2 -> 3.1.3 Oct 10, 2020
@06kellyjac 06kellyjac changed the title kube3d: 3.0.2 -> 3.1.0 -> 3.1.1 -> 3.1.2 -> 3.1.3 kube3d: 3.0.2 -> 3.1.0 -> 3.1.1 -> 3.1.2 -> 3.1.3 -> 3.1.4 Oct 20, 2020
@06kellyjac
Copy link
Member Author

Friendly bump @kuznero @jlesquembre @ngerstle

@06kellyjac 06kellyjac changed the title kube3d: 3.0.2 -> 3.1.0 -> 3.1.1 -> 3.1.2 -> 3.1.3 -> 3.1.4 kube3d: 3.0.2 -> 3.1.0 -> 3.1.1 -> 3.1.2 -> 3.1.3 -> 3.1.4 -> 3.1.5 Oct 22, 2020
@06kellyjac
Copy link
Member Author

I've rebased on master & corrected my mistake with the k3sVersion having the v attached, also version bumped again

@nixos-discourse
Copy link

This pull request has been mentioned on NixOS Discourse. There might be relevant details there:

https://discourse.nixos.org/t/prs-ready-for-review/3032/346

@jlesquembre
Copy link
Member

@06kellyjac Thanks for your PR, I didn't have time to test it, but since it's a simple version dump , it should be ok

@06kellyjac
Copy link
Member Author

Thanks @jlesquembre would you mind if I add myself as a maintainer too?

@jlesquembre
Copy link
Member

@06kellyjac go for it, better to have more maintainers :-)

@06kellyjac
Copy link
Member Author

Added 🙂

jlesquembre
jlesquembre reviewed Oct 25, 2020
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@jlesquembre jlesquembre left a comment •
edited

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I notice that k3d added completions for fish, can you add it too?

    for shell in bash zsh fish; do

Other than that, all looks good, tested it locally

pkgs/applications/networking/cluster/kube3d/default.nix Show resolved Hide resolved
@06kellyjac
Copy link
Member Author

Sure, I'll pop that in tomorrow morning

@06kellyjac
kube3d: add jk as a maintainer
aaa2cf6 
Add jk (myself) as a maintainer to help keeping kube3d working and
up-to-date.
@06kellyjac
Copy link
Member Author

image

I added it to the start of this PR as the feature was added in 3.0.2

@ofborg ofborg bot requested a review from jlesquembre October 26, 2020 09:52
@jlesquembre
Copy link
Member

/marvin opt-in

@jlesquembre
Copy link
Member

@06kellyjac I was trying to use marvin: https://github.com/timokau/marvin-mk2/blob/master/USAGE.md
but looks like the PR author needs to do it, can you try?
I tested it and looks good to me, but I don't have merge rights on nixpkgs.

@06kellyjac
Copy link
Member Author

/marvin opt-in

@marvin-mk2 marvin-mk2 bot added the marvin label Nov 3, 2020
@marvin-mk2
Copy link

marvin-mk2 bot commented Nov 3, 2020

Hi! I'm an experimental bot. My goal is to guide this PR through its stages, hopefully ending with a merge. You can read up on the usage here.

@06kellyjac
Copy link
Member Author

/status needs_merger

@marvin-mk2
Copy link

marvin-mk2 bot commented Nov 3, 2020

The PR author cannot set the status to needs_merger. Please wait for an external review.

If you are not the PR author and you are reading this, please review the usage of this bot. You may be able to help. Please make an honest attempt to resolve all outstanding issues before setting to needs_merger.

@jlesquembre
Copy link
Member

/status needs_merger

@marvin-mk2 marvin-mk2 bot requested a review from timokau November 3, 2020 15:11
@06kellyjac
Copy link
Member Author

Theres also a discourse thread for PRs that are reviewed but need a merger. I'd grab the link but I'm on mobile atm.

timokau
timokau approved these changes Nov 3, 2020
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@timokau timokau left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks!

@timokau timokau merged commit 72097c7 into NixOS:master Nov 3, 2020
@timokau
Copy link
Member

timokau commented Nov 3, 2020

Theres also a discourse thread for PRs that are reviewed but need a merger. I'd grab the link but I'm on mobile atm.

Marvin is intended to be a better replacement for that. It

  • helps you find the initial review as well
  • is higher signal, lower noise (this is mostly from a reviewer/"commiter" perspective since marvin can actually verify that there was a 3rd-party review)
  • distributes the work better by assigning reviewers / "commiters".

Its still experimental though and will likely remain that way for quite a while.

@06kellyjac 06kellyjac deleted the kube3d_3.1.0 branch November 3, 2020 18:40
@06kellyjac
Copy link
Member Author

06kellyjac commented Nov 3, 2020 •
edited

Does marvin have a dashboard too or is it just good at only assigning tags if they're valid & replying well to incorrect commands?

Edit: reading through the marvin repo and the RFCs now

@timokau
Copy link
Member

timokau commented Nov 3, 2020

I'm not sure what you mean. There is no dashboard. What information would you want displayed? If you want to find PRs to review, you can use this filter: needs_reviewer

It usually does not reply to misformatted commands (it should eventually do that, but doesn't for now). The best source of "end user" documentation is probably the bot's "profile" right now.

@06kellyjac
Copy link
Member Author

Yeah I was just wondering if it was adding good tags for filtering or if there was something else it was providing for nixpkgs pr observability that i didnt know about

I dont mean misformatted. I mean it told me when i couldn't change to awaiting merger and that it wanted the reviewer to post it. Which was helpful

@06kellyjac
Copy link
Member Author

If i put /m*rvin opt-in in the original PR description will it work or does it have to be a comment?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@jlesquembre jlesquembre jlesquembre approved these changes

@timokau timokau timokau approved these changes

@kuznero kuznero Awaiting requested review from kuznero

@kalbasit kalbasit Awaiting requested review from kalbasit

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
10.rebuild-darwin: 0 10.rebuild-linux: 1-10 10.rebuild-linux: 1 11.by: package-maintainer awaiting_merger marvin
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet
4 participants
@06kellyjac @nixos-discourse @jlesquembre @timokau