You are viewing an old version of this page. View the current version.

Compare with Current View Page History

« Previous Version 2 Next »

This is an aggregation of three proposed release strategies:

The gist of this proposal is that we always release besu from a release branch, and that release branch only pulls commits from main.

Principles and Benefits

  • main should always be release-able
  • a chain of commits in the release branch from main provide provenance of a release
  • the ability to merge PRs into main is uninhibited by the release process, and the release process itself is not encumbered by changes to main
  • the RC process provides a crisp delineation of burn-in build artifacts and final release artifacts

Example Release Workflow for HL Besu 23.7.3:

  1. Create a release candidate PR which merges `main` into the `release` branch, which also updates the build version to reflect 23.7.3-RC
  2. Upon merge into the release branch, CI builds and publishes the necessary artifacts for the release candidate
  3. Deploy canary and burn-in builds with the published release candidate artifacts
  4. Create a PR against main to bump the build version and add a new version section to CHANGELOG.md to reflect the next snapshot revision
  5. Upon successful validation of the release candidate burn-in:
    1. create a PR against the release branch to update ONLY the build version to 23.7.3, removing the -RC suffix
    2. upon successful build and merge of the release PR:
      1. draft a new github release for 23.7.3
      2. wait for docker artifacts to build and publish
      3. publish the github release with artifact SHAs and announce on HL discord

An alternate outcome where the burn-in fails is a no-op.  Nothing needs to happen except the same process to build a new release candidate with a new version.  We skip 23.7.3, note in CHANGELOG.md that it failed burn-in, and move on to 23.7.4.


This process leaves a cherry-pick escape hatch for hotfixes that is minimum friction for the latest release at least. The biggest element of friction here is the PR which merges main into the release would need to handle the merge conflict that a cherry-pick creates.  This implies that it would be desirable for cherry-picking should to be a rare event, that is done with care.

Currently Trialing this process with 23.7.x

We have been trialing this process for the 23.7.x series of releases, and have encountered essentially all of the scenarios described above. 23.7.0 was a simple merge of main into a new release branch.  However, 23.7.0 failed burn-in, and 23.7.1 was a fast-follow cherry-pick release.  23.7.2 had to account for this cherry pick and the PR to merge main was higher than desired friction.  23.7.3 should be another low friction release.  In all of these, `main` branch development was unimpeded and the release process was not affected by it.


Comments, feedback, and clarification are all welcome.

  • No labels