Paul Nothaft
3ca6378bd7
After the org move + branch rename (#669): beta → main (active development) main → stable (curated release channel) This PR rewires the workflows that referenced the old branch names so release-please and the Docker build target the right channels. ## Workflow changes ### `.github/workflows/docker-build.yml` - **Push triggers**: `[main, beta]` → `[main, stable]` (both `push.branches` and `pull_request.branches`). `beta` no longer exists; `stable` is the curated channel that should also produce builds. - **`is_prerelease` detection**: pre-release context was decided by `refs/heads/beta`; now decided by `refs/heads/main` (active dev → prerelease, `-beta.N` version suffix unchanged). - **`:latest` + `:stable` tagging**: were gated on `{{is_default_branch}}` (which used to be `main` = stable channel). Default branch is now `main` = active dev, so the implicit gate would have aliased `:latest` to dev. Both tags now explicitly gate on `refs/heads/stable` OR a non-prerelease release tag. - **`:beta` tag**: REMOVED. Active-dev pulls are `:main` (auto-generated by `type=ref,event=branch`). The pre-rename `:beta` tag remains frozen at its last build under Option B / #669 — operators are expected to update to `:main` or pin to a versioned tag. ### `.github/workflows/release-please.yml` - `branches: [main]` → `branches: [stable]`. This is the **stable** release-please workflow (uses `release-please-config.json`); after the rename, the stable channel lives on the `stable` branch. ### `.github/workflows/release-please-beta.yml` - `branches: [beta]` → `branches: [main]`. - `target-branch: beta` → `target-branch: main`. - This is the **pre-release** release-please workflow (uses `release-please-config-beta.json`, `prerelease: true`); after the rename, pre-releases are cut from the new `main` (active dev). The version-suffix scheme stays `-beta.N` so existing operator pins keep working. ## RELEASING.md Rewrote the TL;DR, "How a stable release is cut", and hotfix path to reference the new branch names. Added a one-line "branch model background" note pointing at #669 so future maintainers know why `main` means active dev (the opposite of what some projects use). Filename conventions: `release/X.Y.Z-merge-from-main` (was `…-from-beta`); promotion PR title `promote main → stable as vX.Y.Z` (was `promote beta → main`). ## Why combined with PR A's content as a single PR Originally planned as two PRs (B = workflow triggers, C = release-please reconfigure). Splitting wasn't worth it: the configs are branch-agnostic (`release-please-config.json` and `release-please-config-beta.json` don't mention branch names internally), and not bundling them meant a window where the stable release-please workflow would fire on pushes to the new `main` (active dev) — exactly the wrong place. Single PR closes that gap. ## Versioning scheme — kept No version-scheme decision needed. The `-beta.N` suffix on pre-release versions is preserved (existing operator pins like `v3.71.3-beta.0` keep working). If a `v4.0.0-pre.N`-style reset is desired later, that's a separate PR with explicit operator-comms attached.
95 lines
8.3 KiB
Markdown
95 lines
8.3 KiB
Markdown
# Release Process
|
||
|
||
This document describes how PicPeak releases are cut. It's the maintainer's reference, not user documentation — for the user-facing channel choice (stable vs pre-release) see the [Release Channels section in README.md](README.md#-release-channels).
|
||
|
||
## TL;DR
|
||
|
||
- **`main` branch** receives all merged work (active development). Every push triggers a `release-please` PR that proposes the next `vX.Y.Z-beta.N` pre-release. Merging that PR tags the pre-release and publishes Docker images under the `:main` rolling tag + the version-specific tag.
|
||
- **`stable` branch** holds the curated stable channel. Stable releases are cut from a known-good `main` point via a `release/X.Y.Z-merge-from-main` branch and a manual PR to `stable`. Merging that PR triggers `release-please` to propose the stable release.
|
||
- Target cadence: **a stable release every 4–6 weeks**, or sooner if `main` has been quiet and ready for promotion.
|
||
|
||
> **Branch model background** — `main` (active dev) was previously called `beta`, and `stable` (curated channel) was previously called `main`. The rename happened with #669 to match the convention every other open-source project uses. The mechanics below all reference the post-rename names.
|
||
|
||
## Cadence target
|
||
|
||
4–6 weeks between stable releases is the working target. Reasoning:
|
||
|
||
- Long enough that each stable carries meaningful changes worth the upgrade burden.
|
||
- Short enough that pre-release users aren't carrying the "real" project alone for months — the stable channel should actually be usable as the recommended channel for new installs.
|
||
- Aligns with how release-please surfaces pre-releases (multiple pre-release points usually accumulate inside a 4–6 week window, which gives natural promotion candidates).
|
||
|
||
This is a target, not a hard rule. Cut sooner if `main` has been quiet and stable longer than usual. Cut later if `main` is in flux for security or migration reasons.
|
||
|
||
## Promotion criteria
|
||
|
||
A `main` tip is eligible for promotion to `stable` when **all** of the following hold:
|
||
|
||
1. **CI green on the candidate `main` tip.** Specifically: `schema-drift` (`upgrade-from-bootstrap`), `fresh-install`, `Tests` (backend Jest + frontend Vitest), the four `Build and Push Docker Images` arch matrices, and `GitGuardian Security Checks`.
|
||
2. **No open `bug`-labelled issues against the candidate for at least 7 days.** Issues fixed-but-not-yet-closed count as fixed; verify their PR is in the candidate `main` tip before closing them out.
|
||
3. **An upgrade walk has been done on real production-shaped data** — apply the candidate's migration chain to a snapshot of the previous stable's DB and verify no manual intervention is required. CI proves fresh-install works; the upgrade walk is what proves the upgrade path works.
|
||
4. **Operator-time smoke** on the candidate: log in, create event, upload photos, share gallery, open as a customer, log out. Catches binary-incompatibility regressions and UI-level breaks that unit tests don't see.
|
||
|
||
If any of the four fail, the promotion waits. File any blockers as `bug`-labelled issues and let them bake on `main` before re-evaluating.
|
||
|
||
## How a stable release is cut
|
||
|
||
The actual mechanics, in order:
|
||
|
||
1. **Pick the `main` tip.** Confirm it satisfies the four promotion criteria above. Note the exact SHA — that's what you're promoting.
|
||
|
||
2. **Create the release branch from the `main` tip.**
|
||
```bash
|
||
git push origin <main-tip-sha>:refs/heads/release/X.Y.Z-merge-from-main
|
||
```
|
||
Naming convention: `release/X.Y.Z-merge-from-main`, where `X.Y.Z` is the stable version you intend to land. release-please will write the actual `X.Y.Z` on merge — the branch name is just a human label.
|
||
|
||
3. **Open a PR to `stable`.** Title: `chore(release): promote main → stable as vX.Y.Z`. Body should summarise the major themes since the previous stable, the migration count, and any operator notes (e.g. "this release adds 22 migrations; existing installs should snapshot before upgrading"). See PR #568 as a worked example (predates the rename; the mechanics are unchanged).
|
||
|
||
4. **Resolve conflicts.** `stable` almost always has commits `main` doesn't (security backports, release-please's stable-channel release commits, README rewrites). For each conflicting file, decide deliberately:
|
||
- **`backend/package.json` / `package-lock.json` + `frontend/package.json` / `package-lock.json`** — usually take `main`'s version (superset), but verify any security-pinned deps (`axios`, `nodemailer`, `i18next-http-backend`, `multer`, `tar`) on `main` are `>=` the pinned versions on `stable`. If `stable` has a newer pinned version (e.g. an emergency CVE backport `main` hasn't picked up), take `stable`'s pin.
|
||
- **`README.md`** — keep `stable`'s version if it has had a recent rewrite that `main` didn't pick up; otherwise take `main`'s.
|
||
- **`CHANGELOG.md`** — keep `stable`'s; release-please regenerates entries on its next stable cut from the commits going forward.
|
||
- **`.release-please-manifest.json`** — keep `stable`'s; release-please owns this file.
|
||
- Any other auto-merged file — spot-check that the auto-merge produced something sensible, especially for security-sensitive files (`backend/src/middleware/`, `backend/src/utils/tokenUtils.js`).
|
||
|
||
5. **Wait for CI on the PR.** All ten checks (the original eight plus `merge-backend` and `merge-frontend`) must be green. If anything fails, fix on the release branch (NOT on `main` — `main` has already moved on).
|
||
|
||
6. **Merge.** Standard merge commit, not squash — the PR's history (the individual feature commits) carries forward into `stable`'s log.
|
||
|
||
7. **release-please picks it up.** Within minutes, release-please will open a new `chore(stable): release X.Y.Z` PR proposing the stable release. Review the auto-generated CHANGELOG.md entries for accuracy, edit if needed, and merge. That merge creates the `vX.Y.Z` git tag, publishes Docker images on the `:stable` and `:latest` tags, and creates the GitHub Release page.
|
||
|
||
8. **Close the loop.** Bulk-close any `bug` issues that were fixed-but-not-closed and now appear in the released changelog. Reference the merge commit so reporters know which version contains the fix.
|
||
|
||
## Hotfix path (backport to current stable)
|
||
|
||
If a critical bug or security issue affects the current stable and `main` has moved too far for a full promotion to be appropriate, backport just the fix:
|
||
|
||
1. Create a `security/cve-backport-X.Y.Z` or `fix/critical-X.Y.Z` branch off `stable`.
|
||
2. Cherry-pick or hand-write the minimal fix.
|
||
3. Open a PR to `stable` with the smallest possible diff.
|
||
4. After merge, release-please will propose a patch-level stable release (e.g. `v3.55.1`).
|
||
5. **Forward-port the fix to `main`** if it isn't already there. Otherwise the next full promotion will reintroduce the bug.
|
||
|
||
PR #412 ("backport 18 dependency CVE patches from beta") is a worked example of this path (predates the rename; the mechanics are unchanged).
|
||
|
||
## Versioning
|
||
|
||
PicPeak follows [Semantic Versioning](https://semver.org/) with one project-specific convention:
|
||
|
||
- **MAJOR** bumps are reserved for breaking schema changes that require operator action on upgrade (e.g. a migration that's not safe to auto-apply, an env-var rename that can't be auto-detected).
|
||
- **MINOR** bumps for new features, additive schema changes, and any change to the public HTTP API surface.
|
||
- **PATCH** bumps for bug fixes and operator-invisible internal changes.
|
||
- **Pre-release suffix** (`-beta.N`) for every `main`-channel cut; the `N` counter resets on each new MINOR or MAJOR target. The suffix kept the historical `-beta` literal even after the branch rename — operators were already pinning to `v3.x.y-beta.N` and changing the literal would have broken those pins.
|
||
|
||
release-please derives all of this from conventional commit prefixes (`feat:`, `fix:`, `BREAKING CHANGE:`, etc.) automatically.
|
||
|
||
## Things that don't go through this process
|
||
|
||
- **Documentation-only changes** can land on either `stable` or `main` directly (no release cut needed); release-please will pick them up on the next regular release.
|
||
- **Test-only changes** — same.
|
||
- **CI / workflow changes** — same, but be aware they take effect on the branch they land on, so a CI fix targeting `main` won't fix a broken stable-channel workflow until the next promotion.
|
||
|
||
## When this doc is wrong
|
||
|
||
If you find yourself working around something here, update the doc before doing the workaround. The point of a written process is that future-you doesn't have to remember the workaround.
|