I think you're misunderstanding that plugin. It does not associate Jenkins login with gerrit login.
On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 1:45 PM, Bharath Vissapragada <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 1:38 PM, Alex Behm <[email protected]> wrote: > >> That integration sounds like a great idea to me. >> >> Just to clarify the purpose: We'd like external contributors to be able to >> run private build+test runs during development, and not just run GVO once >> the patch has +2. The hard part is gettig the patch to +2 in the first >> place and we've seen instances where relying on local test runs only can be >> difficult. >> >> For example, contributors could upload a draft to gerrit and run a private >> build to fix problems before publishing the patch fir review. >> > > As per this [1] link, I think that can be configured. I haven't tried it > myself, but from the looks of it, it seems plausible. > > [1] > https://wiki.jenkins-ci.org/display/JENKINS/Gerrit+Trigger#GerritTrigger-TriggerConfiguration > > >> >> On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 1:33 PM, Bharath Vissapragada < >> [email protected] >> > wrote: >> >> > Just wondering why we can't link Jenkins authentication with gerrit login >> > in this case instead of having two separate login credentials. That way >> we >> > can retain the audit trail of the jobs and also isolate Jenkins to only >> run >> > code thats approved (+2ed) over gerrit. With this, any new contributor >> > (whoever has signed up on gerrit) can have access to the jenkins box and >> we >> > can be sure that they only run the stuff that is approved by committers. >> > Thoughts? >> > >> > * I'm not totally sure if such an integration is possible but I did a >> quick >> > search and I got a feeling that shouldn't be difficult. >> > >> > On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 1:18 PM, Taras Bobrovytsky < >> > [email protected]> wrote: >> > >> > > I would be more in favor of starting with open access instead of having >> > to >> > > hand out credentials. It's both less work for us and it makes it easier >> > to >> > > contribute. If we notice that this is not working well, or gets abused, >> > we >> > > can switch to what Tim is suggesting. Also, we should be able to see >> who >> > is >> > > using our Jenkins by looking at Gerrit (because the patch must be >> > uploaded >> > > to Gerrit before starting a build). >> > > >> > > On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 10:57 AM, Alex Behm <[email protected]> >> > > wrote: >> > > >> > > > I'm fine with Tim's approach, but it does add some friction to >> > > > contributions. >> > > > >> > > > On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 9:57 AM, Tim Armstrong < >> > [email protected]> >> > > > wrote: >> > > > >> > > > > I mean the contributor could email an email address (e.g. a mailing >> > > list) >> > > > > asking for credentials and we could email them privately. >> > > > > >> > > > > Do we know what other Apache projects do for situations like this? >> > > > > >> > > > > On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 9:18 AM, Alex Behm <[email protected] >> > >> > > > wrote: >> > > > > >> > > > > > Can you clarify the "credentials by mailing list" approach? >> > > > > > >> > > > > > If we send out the credentials on a public list, it's pretty >> close >> > to >> > > > > open >> > > > > > access. >> > > > > > >> > > > > > If we send out credentials to contributors privately, we have an >> > > > > additional >> > > > > > hurdle to contributions. >> > > > > > >> > > > > > On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 9:12 AM, Tim Armstrong < >> > > > [email protected]> >> > > > > > wrote: >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > Got it. >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > I think I'd probably be more in favour of handing out login >> > > > credential >> > > > > to >> > > > > > > contributors on demand (e.g. by mailing a list) rather than >> > having >> > > > > open >> > > > > > > access, just so we have a clearer idea of who's using it. I >> don't >> > > > have >> > > > > a >> > > > > > > strong objection to the alternative. >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 8:52 AM, Jim Apple < >> [email protected] >> > > >> > > > > wrote: >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > How isolated is the Jenkins instance? >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > As far as I know, the workers have little access to the >> > > > coordinator. >> > > > > > See >> > > > > > > > here: >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > https://wiki.jenkins-ci.org/display/JENKINS/Slave+To+ >> > > > > > > Master+Access+Control >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > This flag is on and there are no whitelisted exceptions. >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > Does the jenkins user have many privileges on the VM? >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > They have passwordless sudo on the worker >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > Could it simply wipe >> > > > > > > > > out the job history to destroy the trail? >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Job history is stored on the coordinator. >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > Jenkins also presumably has >> > > > > > > > > credentials to make at least some changes to gerrit - are >> > those >> > > > > > > > privileges >> > > > > > > > > restrictive enough that it couldn't cause problems there >> too? >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Those are stored only on the coordinator and cannot be used >> by >> > > the >> > > > > > > slaves. >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > >>
