Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
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
Add package repository scripts, run in CI (staging PoC) #1916
Add package repository scripts, run in CI (staging PoC) #1916
Changes from 22 commits
a289615
a179839
b4cd8ea
ff02aae
c8a452e
5a3dee2
ea6e752
056156d
2b814c6
9a12318
c34fc05
2585456
a874b03
ffe9ea1
fed0135
e694a16
0fe17bf
d9600c8
4cc0232
c60ff60
b5c3736
90da634
efab809
46e0a1a
dec4712
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
what does
Note that if the object is copied over in parts,
from the documentation of this option means ?I can't find an explanation so I wonder if this is just something that
aws s3 cp
won't do on it's own? or is it something that has a flag that is just badly documented and me searching ... failsThere was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yeah, the documentation is a bit confusing... I think this is mostly relevant when doing multipart uploads, but since we're copying from the same bucket and just replacing the metadata, I don't think it matters. I did have to specify
content-type
manually because otherwise everything getsapplication/octet-stream
:-/This was more intuitive with
s3cmd
which had amodify
command, so hopefully this copying over doesn't incur additional costs.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Nah, the cost of doing this once every 2 months or so is negligible, especially when you're deleting old packages... Though, if we ever figure it out, we might save some bandwidth by completely not hosting the .msi packages on
dl.k6.io
and just redirecting to the github release binaries 😅There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
hmmm, I do wonder if we should not actually drop the whole msi hosting and truly just use github ?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We'd still need a way to redirect people to the latest msi release (and maybe to the other plain zipped binaries we have), which judging by the "CloudFront caches redirects aggressively and I wasn't able to invalidate it" comment below, probably won't be easy to do if we just host redirects to them on dl.k6.io...
The current solution is good enough, and has a nice side-benefit of having a folder with the old installations at hand, we should leave it be, I think...
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yeah, this would be good, though instead of dropping it entirely I'd prefer to have S3 redirects to GH like Ned mentioned, so that we can point users to a central location for all packages.
The caching issue wouldn't be a problem for links to specific versions, as they could remain static. But the link to a latest version would be an issue as it needs to be updated, though we could workaround it if we started publishing an MSI without a version in its filename, e.g.
k6-amd64.msi
. That way the latest link could also be static and redirect tohttps://github.com/k6io/k6/releases/latest/download/k6-amd64.msi
.Anyways, let's leave it as is for now and consider doing this later. It should be transparent to users if done correctly. 😅