OBSDOCS-1843: Logging Z-Stream Release Notes - 6.2.1 #92143
Conversation
openshift-ci-robot
added
the
jira/valid-reference
|
@theashiot: This pull request references OBSDOCS-1843 which is a valid jira issue. In response to this:
Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository. |
openshift-ci
bot
added
the
size/M
|
🤖 Tue Apr 15 17:10:03 - Prow CI generated the docs preview: |
|
@theashiot: This pull request references OBSDOCS-1843 which is a valid jira issue. In response to this:
Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository. |
|
/label peer-review-needed |
openshift-ci
bot
added
the
peer-review-needed
| [id="logging-release-notes-6-2-1-CVEs_{context}"] | ||
| == CVEs | ||
|
|
||
| * link:https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2022-49043[CVE-2022-49043] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There isn't any CVEs in 6.2.1 after I attached the new build. can you update this?
modules/log6x-6-2-1-rn.adoc
Outdated
| [id="logging-release-notes-6-2-1_{context}"] | ||
| = Logging 6.2.1 Release Notes | ||
|
|
||
| This release includes link:https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2025:3908[{logging-uc} {for} Bug Fix Release 6.2.1]. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should we use the advisory name for the link instead? I don't know what makes more sense, but for me just looking at the document and seeing the "advisory identifier" provides more information than repeating that this is about 6.2.1
We mixed this in the past a bit, but looking at the other PRs for this z-stream cycle I think we have settled on the identifier now.
| This release includes link:https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2025:3908[{logging-uc} {for} Bug Fix Release 6.2.1]. | |
| This release includes link:https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2025:3908[RHBA-2025:3908]. |
|
|
||
| * Before this update, Loki ingesters that got into an unhealthy state due to networking issues stayed in that state even after the network recovered. With this update, you can configure the {loki-op} to perform service discovery more often so that unhealthy ingesters can rejoin the group. (link:https://issues.redhat.com/browse/LOG-6992[LOG-6992]) | ||
|
|
||
| * Before this update, the Vector collector could not forward Open Virtual Network (OVN) and Auditd logs. With this update, the Vector collector can forward OVN and Auditd logs. (link:https://issues.redhat.com/browse/LOG-6997[LOG-6997]) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
CVEs are missing:
|
@theashiot: all tests passed! Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository. I understand the commands that are listed here. |
|
/remove-label peer-review-needed |
openshift-ci
bot
added
peer-review-in-progress
|
/remove-label peer-review-in-progress |
openshift-ci
bot
added
peer-review-done
|
LGTM |
|
@theashiot: This pull request references OBSDOCS-1843 which is a valid jira issue. In response to this:
Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository. |
|
@theashiot: This pull request references OBSDOCS-1843 which is a valid jira issue. In response to this:
Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository. |
|
Thanks, @tmalove for the review! best, |
|
/label merge-review-needed Please note: to be merged only after the release goes live. |
openshift-ci
bot
added
the
merge-review-needed
skopacz1
added
the
merge-review-in-progress
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Merge review LGTM!
That said, I am not sure what indication I am supposed to look at to determine whether this release goes live (maybe once the errata link goes live?), so I will wait for you to respond on Slack.
Just in case it goes live while I am not online, and you want to merge it ASAP, I am adding an ok-to-merge label to it. That way, you could either wait for me to come back online or put it back in the queue to be merged as soon as someone looks at the PR.
|
Thanks, @skopacz1 for the review! The release is now live and this can be merged. best, |
|
Sounds good, will attempt auto cherry picks to the other versions to see if they work |
|
/cherrypick enterprise-4.16 |
|
/cherrypick enterprise-4.17 |
|
@skopacz1: new pull request created: #92328 In response to this:
Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository. |
|
@skopacz1: new pull request created: #92329 In response to this:
Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository. |
skopacz1
removed
merge-review-in-progress
Version(s): 4.18, 4.17, 4.16
Issue: https://issues.redhat.com/browse/OBSDOCS-1843
Link to docs preview: https://92143--ocpdocs-pr.netlify.app/openshift-enterprise/latest/observability/logging/logging-6.2/log6x-release-notes-6.2.html
QE review:
Additional information: