Hotfixes when image in Warehouse is older than discoveryLimit
#5512
-
|
I'm using grouped services pattern when 3-5 applications are promoted at once (that has become much easier with #4905, thanks to maintainers!) Engineers build some applications quite frequently and new images aren't instantly delivered to all production stages at once. When 2-3-4 weeks passed, some Stage may use a:1.4.0, another one still may use a:1.2.9. However a:1.2.9 may be older than It's complex to promptly resolve situations, where app a is fine, but engineers need to hotfix app b or app c, and app a:1.2.9 is out of discovery window (new Freight with a:1.2.9 cannot be created, in addition to app b or app c which needs hotfix - engineers need someone with god mode or rebuild also app a) My idea of how to workaround this is to create an additional Warehouse with the same set of subscriptions, but with a more restrictive selection strategy, which excludes dev. builds (and provides enough room for production builds). That would allow to create freights for hotfix purposes, but would make pipeline more complex and still would not allow the use old artifacts for building subsequent freights. Perhaps I could drop a PR with a feature, which will retain currently "active" artifacts and augment them with newly discovered artifacts instead of full replacement (Warehouse could track "active" freights and their artifacts using, for example Are there other options to resolve this issue? I would really appreciate some helpful suggestions. Thanks! |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
Replies: 2 comments
-
|
@Brightside56 I saw you commented on #3533 recently. Although I'd let that go stale, it was mainly on account of the use case that was presented as impetus for it, but what you have described here (and there), I think probably would be best accomplished by some (limited?) ability to specify any arbitrary version of an artifact when manually constructing a piece of Freight. I'll re-open #3533 with a link back to here. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Thank you, let's move to #3533 then |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
@Brightside56 I saw you commented on #3533 recently. Although I'd let that go stale, it was mainly on account of the use case that was presented as impetus for it, but what you have described here (and there), I think probably would be best accomplished by some (limited?) ability to specify any arbitrary version of an artifact when manually constructing a piece of Freight. I'll re-open #3533 with a link back to here.