Closed fitzthum closed 1 month ago
Hello @fitzthum, wouldn't it be clearer to use git revert as you are effectively reverting the https://github.com/confidential-containers/operator/commit/9d14530afece97840799a5b0e2fb8e18fd2a1056 https://github.com/confidential-containers/operator/commit/f36b294d2d7b701505ae9f00b2f5a9c833aa0019 and actually even https://github.com/confidential-containers/operator/commit/aa2706048c0fcd29c0191627de82c8b0f1b51118 ? I think doing so would be a nice practice in the future.
I was thinking about this, but it seemed weird to revert the fairly old change for enclave-cc (we forgot to update those on the last release). I don't really have a preference either way. You might want to comment on https://github.com/confidential-containers/confidential-containers/pull/210 where we are fixing up the release checklist for next time. I think we will probably start using a script to make these changes in the future as well.
Added the host mount.
I don't want this PR to become a catch-all for changes we pick up from Kata. Ideally it should be merged immediately after the release.
I don't want this PR to become a catch-all for changes we pick up from Kata. Ideally it should be merged immediately after the release.
I agree, but if the tests were not passing, we fix the minimum enough to get the CI green (which is the case at this point).
The release is done, so let's go back to the upstream bundles for enclave-cc, kata, and reqs-deploy