Le Wed, Mar 06, 2024 at 12:10:37AM +0000, Lucas Gabriel Vuotto a écrit : > On Mon, Mar 04, 2024 at 01:13:46PM +0100, Denis Fondras wrote: > > Here is a diff to update VictoriaMetrics to v1.99.0. > > > > I also added VictoriaLogs in a separate package. > > > > Denis > > Haven't tested the patch yet, but I have a couple of questions / > discussions about the approach. > > 1. What VictoriaMetrics did with Git tags is ugly in my opinion: > there are v0.5.0-victorialogs and v1.99.0. In this particular case, > the diff is only documentation [0]. But there was a > v0.4.0-victorialogs and v0.4.1-victorialogs with an important bugfix > (make it run non-readonly), and in such cases I don't how a sensible > strategy for picking a newer tag, with the added complexity that it > doesn't match the order of ports' versions. This also raises the > question: do we want to keep the both versions tied together? > > 2. For VictoriaMetrics, I wanted to stick to LTS releases, as they are > supported for 1y which gives enough coverage for OpenBSD release > cycle of roughly 6 months. I'm chceking now, latest LTS release is > 1.97.3, but 1.97.1 is the last one to include non-enterprise tarballs > (doesn't really matter as we build from the GitHub-generated tarball > for the tag--their release are the built artifacts) which makes me > doubt seriously about how much I understand of their releases. > </rant>, I believe that it would be nice sticking with LTS, what do > you think? > > My positions here would be: > > 1. Make VictoriaLogs a different package. A bit wasteful, but the reality > is that the tags differ. > > 2. Stick with LTS. >
Thank you for your input. I'll go back to the workbench :) Denis
