or is there a way to revert back using the version number?
eg, if suppose v0.1.117 was an older version and it's commit id was 46774aa then
instead of
docker run -e PORT=8081 -d -p 3000:8081 --add-host=host.docker.internal:host-gateway -v open-webui:/app/backend/data --name open-webui --restart always ghcr.io/open-webui/open-webui:git-46774aa
use the version number
docker run -e PORT=8081 -d -p 3000:8081 --add-host=host.docker.internal:host-gateway -v open-webui:/app/backend/data --name open-webui --restart always ghcr.io/open-webui/open-webui:v0.1.117
Originally created by @arjunkrishna on GitHub (Apr 5, 2024).
Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/open-webui/open-webui/issues/1429
could the version number be also added as a tag (https://github.com/open-webui/open-webui/pkgs/container/open-webui), that way we do not have to look up the git-xxxxx on the repo commit to figure out which commit it is from (https://github.com/open-webui/open-webui/releases/)
or is there a way to revert back using the version number?
eg, if suppose v0.1.117 was an older version and it's commit id was 46774aa then
instead of
docker run -e PORT=8081 -d -p 3000:8081 --add-host=host.docker.internal:host-gateway -v open-webui:/app/backend/data --name open-webui --restart always ghcr.io/open-webui/open-webui:git-46774aa
use the version number
docker run -e PORT=8081 -d -p 3000:8081 --add-host=host.docker.internal:host-gateway -v open-webui:/app/backend/data --name open-webui --restart always ghcr.io/open-webui/open-webui:v0.1.117
Although the goal was to implement that release process, our current workflow actions are not working as intended. The reason for this could be that addressing this issue has not been deemed urgent. PRs are difficult to test as well as you need to make a release to see the result. Fixes have been attempted by many people already. It's certainly doable but it's just not seen as high priority for the amount of disruption it causes.
<!-- gh-comment-id:2039787145 -->
@justinh-rahb commented on GitHub (Apr 5, 2024):
Although the goal was to implement that release process, our current workflow actions are not working as intended. The reason for this could be that addressing this issue has not been deemed urgent. PRs are difficult to test as well as you need to make a release to see the result. Fixes have been attempted by many people already. It's certainly doable but it's just not seen as high priority for the amount of disruption it causes.
Blocking a user prevents them from interacting with repositories, such as opening or commenting on pull requests or issues. Learn more about blocking a user.
Originally created by @arjunkrishna on GitHub (Apr 5, 2024).
Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/open-webui/open-webui/issues/1429
could the version number be also added as a tag (https://github.com/open-webui/open-webui/pkgs/container/open-webui), that way we do not have to look up the git-xxxxx on the repo commit to figure out which commit it is from (https://github.com/open-webui/open-webui/releases/)
or is there a way to revert back using the version number?
eg, if suppose v0.1.117 was an older version and it's commit id was
46774aatheninstead of
docker run -e PORT=8081 -d -p 3000:8081 --add-host=host.docker.internal:host-gateway -v open-webui:/app/backend/data --name open-webui --restart always ghcr.io/open-webui/open-webui:git-46774aa
use the version number
docker run -e PORT=8081 -d -p 3000:8081 --add-host=host.docker.internal:host-gateway -v open-webui:/app/backend/data --name open-webui --restart always ghcr.io/open-webui/open-webui:v0.1.117
@justinh-rahb commented on GitHub (Apr 5, 2024):
Although the goal was to implement that release process, our current workflow actions are not working as intended. The reason for this could be that addressing this issue has not been deemed urgent. PRs are difficult to test as well as you need to make a release to see the result. Fixes have been attempted by many people already. It's certainly doable but it's just not seen as high priority for the amount of disruption it causes.
@arjunkrishna commented on GitHub (Apr 5, 2024):
thanks for clarifying. Will close this ticket.