[27.x] More backports #30305
[27.x] More backports #30305
Conversation
|
The following sections might be updated with supplementary metadata relevant to reviewers and maintainers. Code CoverageFor detailed information about the code coverage, see the test coverage report. ReviewsSee the guideline for information on the review process.
If your review is incorrectly listed, please react with 👎 to this comment and the bot will ignore it on the next update. |
|
CI note: If you want the Asan task, you'll have to backport it from GHA |
Allows IPV6 functional tests to run inside the container Github-Pull: bitcoin#30193 Rebased-From: 4b527fa
Moving it from Cirrus CI so it can be easier to maintain and used by forks Github-Pull: bitcoin#30193 Rebased-From: 9eea51d
Github-Pull: bitcoin#30299 Rebased-From: 518b06c
See: miniupnp/miniupnp@c0a50ce The return value of 2 now indicates: "A valid connected IGD has been found but its IP address is reserved (non routable)" We continue to ignore any return value other than 1. Github-Pull: bitcoin#30283 Rebased-From: 8acdf66
cb67470 to
d80a6d8
Compare
d80a6d8 to
b3093eb
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
ACK b3093eb
Manually compared each backported commit with its original version.
| ===================== | ||
|
|
||
| Bitcoin Core version 27.1 is now available from: | ||
| Bitcoin Core version 27.x is now available from: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I know we usually do it this way, but what's the harm in just making this (and other references, except for the git tag) 27.2rc1 right away?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The next release might not be 27.2. It could be 27.1.1 etc.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Sure, but that seems to be an undocumented exception? Since 0.10.0, it seems we only have 3 (in the root dir) releases where we we had a non-zero patch number. We also don't mention patch versions in our documentation.
Keeping the git tag to .x makes sense because it gives us the flexibility to release as a minor or a patch version, i.e. we can still easily update the release notes to 27.1.1 if necessary. It just seems like currently the code/doc updates just add a bit of unnecessary churn? Anyway, no biggie either way.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ok. Lets follow up with ways we might want to streamline this for 28.x.
Backports: