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

Release v0.4.23 #6836

Closed
wants to merge 37 commits into from
Closed

Release v0.4.23 #6836

wants to merge 37 commits into from

Conversation

Stebalien
Copy link
Member

@Stebalien Stebalien commented Jan 17, 2020

Begin v0.4.23 patch release, based on v0.4.22.

NOT FOR MERGING

Issue: #6837

When building with docker, we don't have a _full_ git repo.
1. This means those deps don't get pulled in unless we actually need to test.
2. It means we can cordon all the golangci-lint module replace hacks off into a
   separate package.
The patches that required the replace directives have been merged upstream.
Unfortunately, those branches have now been deleted, breaking the build.

GAH!
Stebalien and others added 10 commits January 17, 2020 13:11
We were pining Y then removing the pin for X. When X == Y, we'd remove the new
pin.

fixes #6648
Otherwise, we could abort while fetching the graph and stay in a state where the
direct pin is removed.

fixes #4650
ipfs add whit only hash, don't need to announce cid to other peer
Introduces hardening proposed in:
#4025 (comment)

License: MIT
Signed-off-by: Marcin Rataj <lidel@lidel.org>
"identity" is the official name
@Stebalien Stebalien force-pushed the release-v0.4.23 branch 2 times, most recently from 81403bf to 7e90156 Compare January 17, 2020 23:00
Unfortunately, we don't currently have any way to pick out good relays from bad.
That means we keep searching, trying bad relays, searching some more, trying
_the same relays_, etc. until we randomly find 3 good stable relays. In
practice, this means we just keep searching forever and keep thrashing the DHT.

see libp2p/go-libp2p#694
* tag peers based on usefulness
* finish connecting to providers
Also, use environment variables where appropriate.
@@ -2,26 +2,25 @@ module github.com/ipfs/go-ipfs

require (
Copy link
Contributor

@b5 b5 Jan 26, 2020

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

With this being a stopgap release, I'm wondering if we can't get a few module dependency upgrades to bring version numbers more up to date without wondering into upstream dependencies for 0.5.0. This would help a number of us who import go-ipfs as a dep keep more up-to-date.

Here's my version-minimum wishlist for dependencies within the github.com/ipfs namespace. libp2p is a whole other story, and I'm sure I can find others, but first thought I'd check to see if you're amenable to these type of version bumps:

require (
  // ...
  
  // currently sitting at v0.0.5. latest release is 0.3.1
  // looks like the scary changes happen at 0.2.0
  github.com/ipfs/go-ds-badger v0.0.7

  // currently at v0.0.3
  github.com/ipfs/go-ipfs-config v0.0.11

  // currently at v0.0.3
  github.com/ipfs/go-ipfs-files v0.0.7

  // currently at v0.0.8
  github.com/ipfs/interface-go-ipfs-core v0.2.3

)

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I tried to keep the list of cherry-picked patches to a minimum.

For example, go-ds-badger 0.0.5->0.0.7 rewrites a significant portion of the query logic and adds periodic GC of deleted values. They're both bug fixes but they're definitely not risk-free bug fixes. We want our patch fixes releases to include critical bug fixes without including any bug fixes that may cause more issues than they fix.

Fixes a concurrent map access issue: #6418. The fix for this somehow didn't make
it into 0.4.22 either.
@Stebalien Stebalien closed this Jan 30, 2020
@Stebalien
Copy link
Member Author

Closing as this was a patch release.

@hacdias hacdias deleted the release-v0.4.23 branch May 9, 2023 10:57
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants