On Thu, Jan 17, 2019 at 2:20 PM Anil Belur via RT <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Thu Jan 17 01:13:50 2019, askb wrote: > > On Wed Jan 16 13:31:24 2019, [email protected] wrote: > > > Adding helpdesk. > > > > > > I suppose SET_JDK_VERSION should not be an array. > > > > > > -Lori > > > > Greetings Lori: > > > > This approach for passing multiple java-versions (openjdk8 and > > openjdk11) seem > > to work for the maven-verify jobs but not for the javadocs-verify > > jobs. This is because JJB ${job-name} expansion is handling the > > ${java-version} when the job name has a variable name included. When > > the job name does not have the ${java-version} this is passed as a > > list to the job. > > > > I think we may need to make the scripts a little intelligence to > > handle these scenarios or simply fix this in the job which requires to > > be changed in global-jjb. I've have noted this in Jira and will work > > on fixing this in global-jjb to make sure this works properly for > > other jobs too. > > > > https://jira.linuxfoundation.org/browse/RELENG-1648 > > > > Thanks, > > Anil > > Hello Lori: > > The below change in global-jjb should fix the issue with javadocs jobs. > > https://gerrit.linuxfoundation.org/infra/#/c/14233/ > > I've tested extending the jobs name with java-version on sandbox which works > correctly. > > https://jenkins.opendaylight.org/sandbox/job/lispflowmapping-maven-javadoc-verify-neon-openjdk11 > https://jenkins.opendaylight.org/sandbox/job/lispflowmapping-maven-javadoc-verify-neon-openjdk8
Thanks for fixing the jobs! But I feel that this may be a waste of the already scarce infra resources, for this Javadoc job the default JDK that the use for the merge job should suffice. Especially if more projects will start adding openjdk11 verify jobs, this may be significant added load. Best regards, -Lori > > Thanks, > Anil _______________________________________________ infrastructure mailing list [email protected] https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/infrastructure
