Image for 6.1.0b1

[mauritsvanrees]

I have created branch 6.1.x as simple copy of 6.0.1, and have now created a branch to use 6.1.0b1, which I have just tagged and released on dist.plone.org.

I might very well overlook stuff that needs to be done for a first Docker release in the 6.1.x series.

Also, we may need to come up with a better way to show the table of latest releases: when we do a 6.0.14 release, it would be tedious to have to update both the 6.0.x and 6.1.x branches.

[davisagli]

We should also:

• change the default branch to 6.1.x so that the nightly build uses this
• configure branch protection for the 6.1.x branch
• update the release.yml action so that it only sets IS_LATEST for the correct release series (6.0.x until we have a final release of 6.1)

[davisagli]

The test failed trying to run the plone.volto:default-homepage profile which doesn't exist any longer in Plone 6.1. I didn't look for where this comes from yet, but it probably should be updated to install the default distribution instead.

[fredvd]

Great!

[fredvd]

Hmm waiti. There’s a testing errror. When create-site runs. The plone.volto:default-homepage has a problem. Ah David noted it already as well.

[mauritsvanrees]

We should also:

• change the default branch to 6.1.x so that the nightly build uses this

Yes (though I don't use the nightly). We can do this after this PR actually works and is merged and released.

• configure branch protection for the 6.1.x branch

Done.

• update the release.yml action so that it only sets IS_LATEST for the correct release series (6.0.x until we have a final release of 6.1)

Done.

[mauritsvanrees]

The test failed trying to run the plone.volto:default-homepage profile which doesn't exist any longer in Plone 6.1. I didn't look for where this comes from yet, but it probably should be updated to install the default distribution instead.

This comes from the create_site.py script in the skeleton.
I have now updated this to use distributions. This is adapted from the script for demo.plone.org. I tried to keep supporting the old options, as otherwise we may need to change some documentation somewhere. But the script no longer looks for an OS env ADDITIONAL_PROFILES. So docs may need to be changed anyway.

I did not try the new script myself, nor build the image locally. The tests now fail at plone-basics. I don't know what this is.

I quit for today, and likely this weekend.

[fredvd]

I have tried to replicate the failing lests by trying to run the test suite locally, but are there any requirements for an OS and/or bash version? When I run this on a Mac with Bash 5 (make build-images, then use /test/run.sh) I see several errors before the test suite components even start. Then I do see the plone-basics tests hanging.

the main run.sh script also seeems to have regressions, for examlpe run./sh -t utc plone/plone-backend:6.0.13 runs all tests, where -t utc should according to the README only run the utc test.

[fredvd]

Confirmed that the test suite should be run in recent (Ubuntu) linux only, it runs fine for plone-backend 6.0.13 when I build locally in an Ubuntu 22.04 VM. (using Vmware Fusion on Mac). Now lets test with this branch.

[davisagli]

@fredvd @mauritsvanrees The new distributions-based launch page has different text than what the tests were checking for. I updated the tests, let's see how it goes. I also can't easily run the tests locally since they use some bash features that I don't have on macOS.

[davisagli]

@mauritsvanrees Thanks for working on the site creation script. I'd like to keep support for ADDITIONAL_PROFILES if possible, by running the profiles separately after installing the distribution. I'll try to add this next...

[fredvd]

I also can't easily run the tests locally since they use some bash features that I don't have on macOS.

I updated my bash on my mac to 5 using homebrew and use jt as the default in my Terminals/iTerm2. , but it still seems very different from the bash 5 in Ubuntu.

[davisagli]

@mauritsvanrees @fredvd There we go!

[mauritsvanrees]

Nice!

[davisagli]

@fredvd Is there a reason we didn't create the 6.1.0b1 tag to trigger the image builds yet?

[fredvd]

A reason: No not really, I merged this branch after all feedback was taken into account and I ran the workflow manually on the 6.1.x to test the image with the things we fixed here. But I didn't continue or finish the release after that.

I do see now docker description was also triggered maybe from the testing workflow, that's a bit odd.

[davisagli]

@fredvd Okay. I pushed the tag.