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

Add mechanism for marking an Upgrade as offline only #2201

Closed
swcurran opened this issue Apr 4, 2023 · 1 comment · Fixed by #2204
Closed

Add mechanism for marking an Upgrade as offline only #2201

swcurran opened this issue Apr 4, 2023 · 1 comment · Fixed by #2204
Assignees

Comments

@swcurran
Copy link
Contributor

swcurran commented Apr 4, 2023

As of release 0.8.1, we are making upgrades automatic. When you deploy a version of ACA-Py (as stated in version.py) that is higher than what is stored in the ACA-Py secure storage database, an upgrade is automatically run, based on the contents of the Upgrade Definition YML file. However, in some cases, an upgrade may be particularly risky, and we want to make sure it is run only offline. For example, if the upgrade has side effects that it must only run exactly once, we don't want to an automated upgrade in a Kubernetes environment where the upgrade might be run more than once.

To prevent that, please add a parameter that is optional but that can be added to YML upgrade definitions that prevents an "auto-update". I think there should be two flavours of the parameter -- one that triggers and error and stops the operation, and one that triggers only an entry in the log and continues with processing. The "error and stop" can be used when the upgrade MUST be run before the new version can be deployed. The "log" can be used when the upgrade must be run offline, but is not needed for the new version to be run. In the latter case, the version in storage MUST NOT be updated to the new current ACA-Py version -- it needs to be left as is.

@swcurran
Copy link
Contributor Author

swcurran commented Jun 1, 2023

Related to PR just assigned for review.

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 a pull request may close this issue.

3 participants