I think there are two packaging things I d like us to do bef

Question

I think there are two packaging things I d like us to do before 5 0 goes stable So I ve set a <https github com osquery osquery milestone 57|5 0 1 milestone> to hold those This way we can cut a 5 0 0 release tag for the beta Note that I do not expect 5 0 0 to ever become stable but instead to serve as a fresh iteration point I know there are folks excited to test it

Mike Myers · Answer

Let s not add anything that delays 5 0 We can create a signed standalone `osqueryd` for macOS at any point after tagging 5 0

Mike Myers · Answer

Just a reminder we originally discussed 5 0 immediately following 4 9 but it has now been more than a full release cycle

Mike Myers · Answer

Plain macOS signed osqueryd binary so we ll add a codesign step in the GitHub action We are fixing the default service paths on Linux and the documentation to reflect that That s it and we can tag 5 0 right

Mike Myers · Answer

No new wishlist items added before this release that s what I want us to commit to

seph · Answer

We always intended to distribute a signed bare osqueryd But we didn t realize it wouldn t work this way until we tried slightly smiling face

seph · Answer

I think 1 we should cut a 5 0 0 today 2 I don t expect it to become stable 3 I think we should aim for a 5 0 1 or 5 0 2 as stable 4 But I m sure people want to start playing with 5 0 0

seph · Answer

TBH I m not sure I feel like there s much wiggle room for me on any of those

Mike Myers · Answer

I feel like we can do the two things today from your 5 0 1 milestone

Mike Myers · Answer

then it just becomes 5 0 unless there s osmething wrong with it

seph · Answer

Sure But I m kinda assuming we ll find some bug It s a lot of churn

seph · Answer

Would you rather we cut a 5 0 0 now and then itearated and planned on a 5 0 1 or for me to hold off and we can cut a 5 0 0

seph · Answer

Note that Stefano disagrees with something in that milestone and he may be right

Mike Myers · Answer

I just talked to the guys and they really think the two tasks can be knocked out today

Mike Myers · Answer

then a 5 0 tag would be good

seph · Answer

Yes I d bet any of the cmake folk can handle the bare osquery one in a couple hours

seph · Answer

But what would you prefer Cut a 5 0 0 now or hold till tomorrow

seph · Answer

I may not manage release notes today But I think they can merge post

Mike Myers · Answer

Bug discovering that s entirely possible my goal is just to keep the release from creeping any further 5 0 checklist notes can be done after the tag right

Mike Myers · Answer

Prefer to cut a 5 0 today but I was going to say later today we have two PRs to merge that are in progress

seph · Answer

We ve done the changelog both before and after Downside to after is that it doesn t show up in any built packages Downside to before is that it s more work slightly smiling face

seph · Answer

I m going to be surprised if there are no bugs that merit another release in this line So I see an early 5 0 0 as a way to get testing turned around faster But I think you re the person feeling the most urgency so I can defer to you

Mike Myers · Answer

I can try to help with that then It s a two step process first you auto gen from commit comments and then we clean up add details right

seph · Answer

Yes And the tooling to auto gen is checked in and documented Mostly I m trying to get another thing done for kolide this afternoon

Mike Myers · Answer

Well we need at least the PR to unbreak service paths in Linux from Stefano then we can tag 5 0 whereupon it ll have working pre release packages for people to test Changelog and the additional GH Action for signing the standalone osqueryd on macOS will go in before a 5 0 1 tag

seph · Answer

Another service path bug I know I merged one PR for that

seph · Answer

I m pretty happy to cut 5 0 0 whenever you feel like you want it And I m expecting we ll need a 5 0 1

Stefano Bonicatti · Answer

<https github com osquery osquery issues 7277> it s this issue the code part

Mike Myers · Answer

Stefano said he had a documentation PR for the path changes

seph · Answer

docs can land in 5 0 1

Mike Myers · Answer

ok then it sounds like we can tag 5 0 now Stefano it s fixed in code just not in documentation

Stefano Bonicatti · Answer

we haven t updated any paths in the code and so service files internally are referring to the wrong paths for osqueryd plus a couple of other incorrect default paths What we have fixed yesterday was where CMake was installing those service files

Mike Myers · Answer

ok then holding off on 5 0 tag until later today

seph · Answer

Sounds like we should wait

sharvil · Answer

I think Stefano means these files <https github com osquery osquery blob master tools deployment linux packaging deb osqueryd service>

sharvil · Answer

seph · Answer

<https github com osquery osquery pull 7276> should sneak in before we go really stable too Another breaking change

Stefano Bonicatti · Answer

There will be other breaking changes soon after 5 0 because it s stuff we didn t manage to do now I don t see it as a 5 0 blocker If we can sneak it fine but I wouldn t stop for it

seph · Answer

gt There will be other breaking changes soon after 5 0 because it s stuff we didn t manage to do now Do you have something in mind We generally try really hard not to break things

Stefano Bonicatti · Answer

I m really trying to make a difference between things that will break osquery and things that might will break something for the customer using it I don t want to delay this release spec changes or similar can be delayed we already did that anyway

Stefano Bonicatti · Answer

So I wasn t meaning anything that would break osquery

Stefano Bonicatti · Answer

Ok let me rephrase there are other things that we know we want to do that will maybe break stuff for the customer if merged meaning the customer has to change something I know we sort of called 5 0 as the breaking changes release but we didn t got all of them there It s fine we have inserted other breaking changes on other versions anyway I don t want to stop a release for them

seph · Answer

I think I m mostly in alignment That PR specifically was originally just going to hide some columns But if it squeeks in we can drop the columns and option But I kinda don t want to drop options randomly we d instead just noop them So I think it s all about code cleanliness

seph · Answer

Anyhow Draft changelog I didn t wordsmith at all yet <https github com osquery osquery pull 7284 files>