That was just for configuring the gerrit trigger. Regarding auth integration, I read this page. Does it not work?
https://wiki.jenkins-ci.org/display/JENKINS/GitHub+OAuth+Plugin#GitHubOAuthPlugin-AboutGitHubAuthenticationPlugin On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 1:50 PM, Jim Apple <[email protected]> wrote: > 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. > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> >
