Skip to content

fix: Add v2 migration and release safeguards - #295

Open
casey-coreweave wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
cabernathy/add-v2-migration-release-safeguards
Open

fix: Add v2 migration and release safeguards#295
casey-coreweave wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
cabernathy/add-v2-migration-release-safeguards

Conversation

@casey-coreweave

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Summary

  • add a single-controller v1-to-v2 cutover and rollback runbook with Helm-owned Redis protection
  • add migration, rollout, and browser object-store smoke-test gates before v1 cleanup
  • align official prerelease chart, image, and GitHub release versions while reserving -dev.* for internal chart builds
  • document and pin the public Operator v2 OCI install path

Testing

  • actionlint .github/workflows/release.yaml .github/workflows/internal-chart-publish.yaml
  • helm lint --strict deploy/operator
  • make test

@casey-coreweave
casey-coreweave requested a review from a team as a code owner July 23, 2026 22:04
@coderabbitai

coderabbitai Bot commented Jul 23, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Warning

Review limit reached

@casey-coreweave, you've reached your PR review limit, so we couldn't start this review.

Next review available in: 34 minutes

Enable usage-based reviews in Billing to review now. Otherwise, wait until the next included review is available.
You're only billed for reviews past your plan's rate limits ($0.25/file).

How can I continue?

After more reviews become available, a review can be triggered using the @coderabbitai review command as a PR comment. Alternatively, push new commits to this PR.

To avoid repeated limits, reduce automatic review volume by pausing incremental auto-reviews earlier, using label-based review opt-in, excluding WIP or generated PR titles, or requesting reviews manually when the PR is ready. If your team needs uninterrupted high-volume reviews, an organization admin can enable usage-based reviews.

How do review limits work?

CodeRabbit enforces per-developer PR review limits for each organization. Most developers receive the normal plan review availability.

For paid Pro and Pro+ PR reviews, CodeRabbit uses adaptive limits for sustained high-volume activity. When a developer's recent PR review activity reaches the 95th percentile or higher among CodeRabbit users, additional reviews become available more gradually as earlier reviews age out of the rolling window.

Please refer docs for additional details.

Review details
⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: defaults

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro Plus

Run ID: 605c03f0-c75e-481a-a72b-904065747d54

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between dc61599 and bc21700.

📒 Files selected for processing (5)
  • .github/workflows/internal-chart-publish.yaml
  • .github/workflows/release.yaml
  • README.md
  • docs/migrating-v1-to-v2.md
  • docs/releasing.md
✨ Finishing Touches
🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
  • Create PR with unit tests
  • Commit unit tests in branch cabernathy/add-v2-migration-release-safeguards

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands.

Pointing v2 at the v1 Redis Service does not make it safe to uninstall the
v1 release.

## Enter single-controller mode

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'm not sure that we want to advise even deploying them side by side, in my testing I applied the operator v2 helm chart as an upgrade over the v1 helm release.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

it might requires some pre-upgrade steps to make sure that all the resources are annotated correctly for the transition, but it might be cleaner

Redis. The uninstall deletes the Redis workload even if the v2 resource calls
it "external."

## Rollback

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think if we want to have a rollback path we may need to disable some features on v2, or data created after the upgrade may not be complete.

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 this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants