Skip to content

feat: build .deb and .rpm release files#1311

Merged
phm07 merged 6 commits intomainfrom
build-linux-packages
Feb 26, 2026
Merged

feat: build .deb and .rpm release files#1311
phm07 merged 6 commits intomainfrom
build-linux-packages

Conversation

@phm07
Copy link
Contributor

@phm07 phm07 commented Jan 15, 2026

This PR adds the following package files to releases:

  • hcloud-cli-1.59.0-1.aarch64.rpm
  • hcloud-cli-1.59.0-1.x86_64.rpm
  • hcloud-cli_1.59.0_amd64.deb
  • hcloud-cli_1.59.0_arm64.deb

@phm07 phm07 self-assigned this Jan 15, 2026
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jan 15, 2026

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 72.56%. Comparing base (7756f5d) to head (42b93b6).
⚠️ Report is 7 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #1311      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   72.43%   72.56%   +0.12%     
==========================================
  Files         301      300       -1     
  Lines       11005    10986      -19     
==========================================
  Hits         7972     7972              
+ Misses       2144     2125      -19     
  Partials      889      889              
Flag Coverage Δ
e2e 51.49% <ø> (ø)
unit 67.56% <ø> (+0.11%) ⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

@phm07
Copy link
Contributor Author

phm07 commented Jan 16, 2026

Some considerations:

  • Right now goreleaser generates a lot of package files, because it generates one for each architecture. We might want to limit those, amd64 and arm64 would probably be enough. (We still offer direct binary downloads for all architectures anyway)
  • Packages are not signed yet. This causes a problem on alpine for example: ERROR: hcloud-cli_1.59.0_x86_64.apk: UNTRUSTED signature. We'd need to create a key and provide it to users so they can install it

@phm07 phm07 marked this pull request as ready for review January 22, 2026 09:14
@phm07 phm07 requested a review from a team as a code owner January 22, 2026 09:14
@phm07 phm07 force-pushed the build-linux-packages branch from 5f9b15c to be4a77e Compare January 22, 2026 13:07
@phm07 phm07 changed the title feat: build .deb, .rpm and .apk release files feat: build .deb and .rpm release files Jan 22, 2026
@phm07
Copy link
Contributor Author

phm07 commented Jan 23, 2026

The manpage output (as well as the generated markdown docs) would have a way better table view if the tables are printed using markdown format. Our table renderer already supports this, we just need to find a way to switch between the pretty print and markdown. I used a custom config option for now but it doesn't seem to work, because viper is not loaded if you only generate docs/manpages. I'll have a look at this another time.

Copy link
Member

@apricote apricote left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

There is still something weird going on with the option table, the rows and columns are not consistent, see no-experimental-warnings and poll-interval

Image

@phm07 phm07 force-pushed the build-linux-packages branch from b47f89d to 305377e Compare February 6, 2026 09:43
@phm07 phm07 force-pushed the build-linux-packages branch from 305377e to d4b548c Compare February 6, 2026 09:45
Copy link
Member

@apricote apricote left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looking good in general. Please document the new release artifacts for users. Should we mark them as experimental at first?

@phm07
Copy link
Contributor Author

phm07 commented Feb 26, 2026

Docs have been updated now.

Should we mark them as experimental at first?

Maybe, but I'm not sure if this would be confusing with the way we use the experimental wording currently

@apricote
Copy link
Member

I think the first paragraph from the experimental section applies here as well:

Experimental features are published as part of our regular releases (e.g. a product public beta). During an experimental phase, breaking changes on those features may occur within minor releases.

@phm07 phm07 merged commit 621246f into main Feb 26, 2026
7 checks passed
@phm07 phm07 deleted the build-linux-packages branch February 26, 2026 14:19
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.

2 participants