Le Wed, Mar 06, 2024 at 12:10:37AM +0000, Lucas Gabriel Vuotto a écrit :
> On Mon, Mar 04, 2024 at 01:13:46PM +0100, Denis Fondras wrote:
> > Here is a diff to update VictoriaMetrics to v1.99.0.
> >
> > I also added VictoriaLogs in a separate package.
> >
> > Denis
>
> Haven't tested the patch yet, but I have a couple of questions /
> discussions about the approach.
>
> 1. What VictoriaMetrics did with Git tags is ugly in my opinion:
> there are v0.5.0-victorialogs and v1.99.0. In this particular case,
> the diff is only documentation [0]. But there was a
> v0.4.0-victorialogs and v0.4.1-victorialogs with an important bugfix
> (make it run non-readonly), and in such cases I don't how a sensible
> strategy for picking a newer tag, with the added complexity that it
> doesn't match the order of ports' versions. This also raises the
> question: do we want to keep the both versions tied together?
>
> 2. For VictoriaMetrics, I wanted to stick to LTS releases, as they are
> supported for 1y which gives enough coverage for OpenBSD release
> cycle of roughly 6 months. I'm chceking now, latest LTS release is
> 1.97.3, but 1.97.1 is the last one to include non-enterprise tarballs
> (doesn't really matter as we build from the GitHub-generated tarball
> for the tag--their release are the built artifacts) which makes me
> doubt seriously about how much I understand of their releases.
> </rant>, I believe that it would be nice sticking with LTS, what do
> you think?
>
> My positions here would be:
>
> 1. Make VictoriaLogs a different package. A bit wasteful, but the reality
> is that the tags differ.
>
> 2. Stick with LTS.
>
Thank you for your input. I'll go back to the workbench :)
Denis
No comments:
Post a Comment