[electron-update-server] Introduce new version
ClosedPublic
Actions

Authored by michal on Jun 23 2023, 2:44 AM.

Details

Reviewers

bartek
varun
• jon

Commits

rCOMMab08c20a59d7: [electron-update-server] Introduce new version

Summary

New release after fixes for ENG-4073, diff: D8208.

now there's a repository in docker hub so added commapp/ to the image
needed to update the Dockerfile to match the keyserver one

Test Plan

Build docker image and push to docker hub

Diff Detail

Repository

rCOMM Comm

Branch

michal/electron-update-server-v1

Lint

No Lint Coverage

Unit

No Test Coverage

Event Timeline

michal created this revision.Jun 23 2023, 2:44 AM

Herald added subscribers: tomek, ashoat. · View Herald TranscriptJun 23 2023, 2:44 AM

It's not in the main services' docker-compose.yml but it's completely standalone and doesn't interact with other services, keyserver or app code so I'm on the fence if I should change it.

Harbormaster returned this revision to the author for changes because remote builds failed.Jun 23 2023, 3:07 AM

Harbormaster failed remote builds in B20455: Diff 28037!

michal requested review of this revision.Jun 23 2023, 7:18 AM

seems to fine to me, but I will leave docker-specific items to bartek or varun

do we even need a docker-compose.yml file for this service?

This revision now requires changes to proceed.Jun 26 2023, 6:56 PM

The dockerfile needs to be built with the context of the root folder (because it's a member of the yarn workspace) and it's on dockerhub so we need to keep track of the current tag/version. To me, it makes sense to keep track of that in a docker-compose.yml.

LGTM

In D8305#245627, @michal wrote:

The dockerfile needs to be built with the context of the root folder (because it's a member of the yarn workspace) and it's on dockerhub so we need to keep track of the current tag/version. To me, it makes sense to keep track of that in a docker-compose.yml.

Makes sense to me,
until we decide if we should go with docker-compose or custom make_docker_image.sh scripts, we should support both (or at least one)

varun accepted this revision.Jun 28 2023, 11:40 AM

This revision is now accepted and ready to land.Jun 28 2023, 11:40 AM

As an aside, might be good to configure docker/build-push-actions for automatically pushing to DockerHub: https://github.com/docker/build-push-action

I doubt electron-update-server will change much since it's so simple, but that might make it a good candidate to experiment with since I'm sure it's a lot faster to build than eg keyserver which is 25 min on GH Actions.

Given that the "action" is provided by Docker and that the examples look simple, seems like it might be a 30 min thing?

In D8305#246325, @atul wrote:

As an aside, might be good to configure docker/build-push-actions for automatically pushing to DockerHub: https://github.com/docker/build-push-action

I doubt electron-update-server will change much since it's so simple, but that might make it a good candidate to experiment with since I'm sure it's a lot faster to build than eg keyserver which is 25 min on GH Actions.

Given that the "action" is provided by Docker and that the examples look simple, seems like it might be a 30 min thing?