Closed pbusko closed 4 months ago
Seems like current automation does not correctly react to the addition of new stack. It reports that no version/stack combination needs compilation.
@paketo-buildpacks/python-maintainers Should we set PR labels (and could we @pbusko)? Seems to me that all other checks are waiting on this one before they even start.
Ah no, they are waiting for explicit approval from @paketo-buildpacks/python-maintainers
@pbusko Other than the above comment LGTM - but as is convention do we have an RFC approved to introduce Noble support across Paketo? I couldn't find one. @paketo-buildpacks/steering-committee Do we have consensus to rollout noble-based dependencies?
@pbusko Other than the above comment LGTM - but as is convention do we have an RFC approved to introduce Noble support across Paketo? I couldn't find one. @paketo-buildpacks/steering-committee Do we have consensus to rollout noble-based dependencies?
Hi @arjun024, I was about to reply that "yes, sure we have an RFC to adopt every LTS" but I have to say that I can't find anything other than the specific RFCs for Jammy. However, I recall for sure that we discussed back when Jammy was introduced, that we would adopt every LTS (instead of every other as it was for e.g. the CF buildpacks).
We have discussed in WG Meetings and on Slack and I actually created repositories for stacks and buildpackless builders already.
@loewenstein SGTM. @pbusko Please also rebase the branch onto main after you add the tests. The PR is currently not mergeable.
Summary
Update automation to support Ubuntu Noble based stacks
Use Cases
Noble based stacks support
Checklist