feat: node.js v16.0.0

[dnalborczyk]

Description

• removed alpine v3.10 as it is EOL very soon: 2021-05-01

Motivation and Context

Testing Details

Example Output(if appropriate)

Types of changes

• Documentation
• Version change (Update, remove or add more Node.js versions)
• Variant change (Update, remove or add more variants, or versions of variants)
• Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
• New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
• Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to change)
• Others (non of above)

Checklist

• My code follows the code style of this project.
• My change requires a change to the documentation.
• I have updated the documentation accordingly.
• I have read the CONTRIBUTING.md document.
• All new and existing tests passed.

[nschonni]

We're blocked till the Alpine binaries are built https://unofficial-builds.nodejs.org/download/release/v16.0.0/

[dnalborczyk]

I see, only skimmed over the Dockerfile. I thought I had it building locally. out of curiosity, what is the "Building from source" condition for?

[nschonni]

I think mostly a fail safe for anyone doing a manual build. The dockerhub image layers are built using the binary version though, so we wait till they're ready

[tianon]

Also for the other architectures beyond the three that get built in the unofficial builds project. 😅

[nschonni]

Yeah, I was going to caveat that around the s360 etc.., but it's a confusing story

[nschonni]

Thanks! I did the same thing locally waiting for the binaries. I agree that 3.10 doesn't make sense to include this close to the EOL

[SimenB]

The build failed: https://unofficial-builds.nodejs.org/logs/202104201637-v16.0.0/musl.log

@rvagg @mmarchini is this known? 🙂

[nschonni]

@SimenB being tracked here nodejs/unofficial-builds#28 (comment)
It hit the similar Python 3 thing we did before

[rvagg]

it be fixed now, thanks for your patience, sorry to hold up

[SimenB]

@dnalborczyk can you regenerate?

[SimenB]

Do we need 3 versions of alpine? Would it be enough with the last 2 (or even just 3.13)?

[SimenB]

We should also remove stretch, it has been EOL since July 2020

[nschonni]

Do we need 3 versions of alpine? Would it be enough with the last 2 (or even just 3.13)?

I was looking for my old thread trying to nail down policy on these ones, but since this seems to be the approach we have now, I'm going to go ahead an land

[SimenB]

why do we land with EOL distros?

[github-actions]

Created PR on the official-images repo (docker-library/official-images#10030). See https://github.com/docker-library/faq#an-images-source-changed-in-git-now-what if you are wondering when it will be available on the Docker Hub.

[SimenB]

I don't think we should release v16 with stretch as v16 is not scheduled to be EOL until 2024

[nschonni]

We should also remove stretch, it has been EOL since July 2020

Stretch LTS is still active till 2022

[SimenB]

Security updates have been discontinued as of July 6th, 2020.

https://www.debian.org/releases/stretch/

And whenever they stop in 2022 we'll need to keep it for 2 more years

(not as bad as I was thinking since they have some sort of LTS, but I still think we should drop it for a release line that will become LTS)

[nschonni]

I think we've dropped tags/distros like Alpine mid-way through release lines already. EX: 16.10.0 might be the last 16-stretch tag if we decide to drop it for 16.11

[nschonni]

Probably better to open a separate dicussion though, as this exchange will never be findable again