Skip to content

Conversation

@ronaldngounou
Copy link
Member

@ronaldngounou ronaldngounou commented May 2, 2025

Overview

This PR aims to fix partially the issue #773.

My contributions:

  1. I deleted the "Upgrading etcd clusters and applications" page.
  2. I created a folder located in content/en/docs/v3.5/upgrades/archives_upgrades to contain upgrade archives. Then, I added the upgrades from 2.3 to 3.0, namely upgrade_3_0.md to that folder.

A second task related to this issue that this PR is not solving yet is to list document which upgrade paths are supported, recommended, deprecated, and unsupported at the top of the "Upgrading" main page.

I would suggest adding these versions in the list as I am waiting for approval.
recommended: [3.5.21] deprecated: [3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 3.4] unsupported: [2.3 to 3.0]

Testing

npm run serve

@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: ronaldngounou
Once this PR has been reviewed and has the lgtm label, please assign ivanvc for approval. For more information see the Code Review Process.

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link

Hi @ronaldngounou. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a etcd-io member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with /ok-to-test on its own line. Until that is done, I will not automatically test new commits in this PR, but the usual testing commands by org members will still work. Regular contributors should join the org to skip this step.

Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the ok-to-test label.

I understand the commands that are listed here.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Why did you delete this file?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@dwelsch-esi stated in the issue description that

The "Upgrading etcd clusters and applications" page seems redundant. The "Upgrading" link could goes straight to the main upgrade page, which contains the same information. There's no need to ever visit the Upgrading etcd clusters and applications page.

That's why I deleted that page.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Aha.

@jberkus
Copy link
Contributor

jberkus commented Jun 5, 2025

/retest

@jberkus
Copy link
Contributor

jberkus commented Jun 5, 2025

We can ignore the linter failure since it's all content for the 3.0 page. However, I can't merge it until Netlify deploy succeeds, and it's not saying why it's failing. It may not even be related to your changes.

@jberkus
Copy link
Contributor

jberkus commented Jun 5, 2025

/retest

@ronaldngounou
Copy link
Member Author

ronaldngounou commented Jun 6, 2025

The deployment is failing because target does not exist --- docs/v3.5/upgrades/upgrade_3_1/index.html --> ../upgrade_3_0. As I moved the upgrade_3.0.md file to the /upgrades/archives_upgrade folder, the reference to the page in upgrade_3.1.md in not the same anymore because the path changed.

@ronaldngounou ronaldngounou force-pushed the issue773-upgrade-etcd-clusters-app-page branch 3 times, most recently from 0a963d7 to b5635cb Compare June 6, 2025 05:02
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added size/M and removed size/S labels Jun 6, 2025
@ronaldngounou ronaldngounou force-pushed the issue773-upgrade-etcd-clusters-app-page branch 2 times, most recently from d201ded to ea0a2d2 Compare June 6, 2025 05:34
@ivanvc
Copy link
Member

ivanvc commented Jun 6, 2025

/ok-to-test

This commit updates the link in the upgrade_3_1.md file to point to the
archives upgrade page instead of the main upgrade page. This change
ensures that users are directed to the correct page.

Signed-off-by: Ronald Ngounou <[email protected]>
@ronaldngounou ronaldngounou force-pushed the issue773-upgrade-etcd-clusters-app-page branch from 9f1dcd2 to eea0c34 Compare June 6, 2025 05:50
@jberkus
Copy link
Contributor

jberkus commented Jun 6, 2025

You didn't actually need to fix the markdown issues with the 3.0 upgrade file ;-)

However: the move to the archives folder doesn't make any difference for anyone reading the documentation. Take a look at the preview; it still looks the same. This brings up the question of, what are we trying to do with the file move? It doesn't break anything, but it doesn't do anything either.

If we want to have some upgrades be "older version upgrades", then we'd need to put an _index in the Archive Upgrades folder, so that it gets displayed as one item. After that, it might be worth moving the 3.1 and 3.2 upgrades as well. But is that worth doing?

@jberkus
Copy link
Contributor

jberkus commented Jun 6, 2025

So, I'm looking at #773, and what Dave is talking about has nothing to do with folders.

What Dave is asking for is some useful documentation on how to upgrade, in general, in the main _index page. That is, adding statements like The only supported method of upgrading is one feature version of etcd at a time. If you are currently on 3.4 and want to upgrade to 3.6, you will need to upgrade to 3.5 first.

It would also be useful to mark out the upgrade steps that have not been recently tested, which is anything before 3.4.

All of this would be done in the _index file.

jberkus and others added 26 commits June 12, 2025 15:39
…arch-2

Disable exclude_search in _index.md (3.6)
…gate_error

Fix the issue of incorrect description of "operations." in the TxnModeWriteWithSharedBuffer function
Bumps [hugo-extended](https://github.com/jakejarvis/hugo-extended) from 0.147.5 to 0.147.8.
- [Commits](jakejarvis/hugo-extended@v0.147.5...v0.147.8)

---
updated-dependencies:
- dependency-name: hugo-extended
  dependency-version: 0.147.8
  dependency-type: direct:development
  update-type: version-update:semver-patch
...

Signed-off-by: dependabot[bot] <[email protected]>
Add etcd-workbench link to tools
…hugo-extended-0.147.8

Bump hugo-extended from 0.147.5 to 0.147.8
Updates the requirements on [docsy](https://github.com/google/docsy) to permit the latest version.
- [Release notes](https://github.com/google/docsy/releases)
- [Commits](https://github.com/google/docsy/commits/ace4e37ceedcec9c48d329adb1128201061ef23d)

---
updated-dependencies:
- dependency-name: docsy
  dependency-version: ace4e37ceedcec9c48d329adb1128201061ef23d
  dependency-type: direct:development
...

Signed-off-by: dependabot[bot] <[email protected]>
…docsy-0.12.0

Update docsy requirement from 0.11.0 to 0.12.0
…al-how-to-transactional-write

Revise website tutorial how-to-transactional-write
…rt2_clean

Recursively copy the contents of v3.6 to v3.7
This commit updates the link in the upgrade_3_1.md file to point to the
archives upgrade page instead of the main upgrade page. This change
ensures that users are directed to the correct page.

Signed-off-by: Ronald Ngounou <[email protected]>
This commit updates the link in the upgrade_3_1.md file to point to the
archives upgrade page instead of the main upgrade page. This change
ensures that users are directed to the correct page.

Signed-off-by: Ronald Ngounou <[email protected]>
@jberkus
Copy link
Contributor

jberkus commented Jun 30, 2025

Ooof, that did not go well. Here's my recommendation:

  1. Make sure that your main branch is synced with upstream
  2. Create a new branch based on main for the upgrades changes
  3. copy over just the text of the changes to the index file.
  4. Commit that and push it to a new branch
  5. Open a new PR and reference this one.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

7 participants