Skip to content
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

[DNM testing] notifications/libp2p: Terminate the outbound notification substream on std::io::Errors #7742

Open
wants to merge 7 commits into
base: stable2412
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

lexnv
Copy link
Contributor

@lexnv lexnv commented Feb 27, 2025

This PR cherry-picks #7724 to deploy on kusama validators for extended info testing.

Backport for:

Copy link
Contributor

This pull request is amending an existing release. Please proceed with extreme caution,
as to not impact downstream teams that rely on the stability of it. Some things to consider:

  • Backports are only for 'patch' or 'minor' changes. No 'major' or other breaking change.
  • Should be a legit fix for some bug, not adding tons of new features.
  • Must either be already audited or not need an audit.
Emergency Bypass

If you really need to bypass this check: add validate: false to each crate
in the Prdoc where a breaking change is introduced. This will release a new major
version of that crate and all its reverse dependencies and basically break the release.

Recently there were some requests to build and deploy a binary, for
example `polkadot`, in the `release` or `production` profile to do some
testing.
So far we had only a
[release](https://github.com/paritytech/polkadot-sdk/blob/master/.github/workflows/release-20_build-rc.yml)
pipeline that could do it in the GitHub but to use it, there was a lot
of extra overhead needed.
This pipeline should simplify this case and give a possibility to build
a binary in desired profile from any branch for the testing purposes.
Something similar to what we have for runtimes in the [srtool
repo](https://github.com/paritytech/srtool/actions/workflows/manual.yml)
It won't be used in any release activities though.

CC: @BulatSaif
@lexnv lexnv requested review from a team as code owners February 27, 2025 09:49
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants