Thanks for keeping your eye on it Liam, I will take necessary actions this week!
On Friday, April 20, 2018 at 8:26:45 PM UTC+2, Liam Newman wrote: > > Ewelina, Nicolas, > > I'm jumping in because I don't see anyone mentioning who will be doing > this. > > As JEP-1 sponsor, I would like to remind you that part of your duties as > sponsors of JEP-201 include different viewpoints and design suggestions in > your JEP. (I'm jumping in because I don't see anyone mentioning who will be > doing this.) Even if you choose not to use the suggestions, they need to > be represented in the "Reasoning" section. > > Just as Jesse pulled this feedback to a discussion here so it wouldn't be > lost in IRC, it will need to be distilled from this extended discussion to > be added to the JEP. Here's two examples of "Reasoning" sections with > significant content: > > https://github.com/jenkinsci/jep/tree/master/jep/1#reasoning > https://github.com/jenkinsci/jep/tree/master/jep/200#reasoning > > It looks to me like there are at least three threads here: automatic > symbol inference, YAML Map syntax and Credentials, and Replacing Job DSL > Groovy syntax. There might also be a general list of features that have > been deemed out-of-scope for the current release. > > You may ask Jesse if he'd be willing to submit PRs (adding to > "Specification" or "Reasoning"), but ultimately it is your responsibility > to make sure it happens. > > Thanks, > -L. > > > > On Tuesday, April 17, 2018 at 11:31:30 PM UTC-7, Ewelina Wilkosz wrote: >> >> interesting discussion! >> >> I agree we can have a nicer way of configuring job, to keep the >> consistency, but I also agree with Nicolas about not wanting to "re-invent >> the wheel" - many users have their job dsls ready, so the transition may be >> easier if they don't need to learn a new syntax, that was my motivation for >> keeping job dsl. Alternative solution may exist next to job dsl support I >> believe >> >> On Wednesday, April 18, 2018 at 6:53:58 AM UTC+2, nicolas de loof wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> 2018-04-18 0:42 GMT+02:00 Jesse Glick <[email protected]>: >>> >>>> On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 4:45 PM, nicolas de loof >>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> > Job class hierarchy is full of hand written JSON parsing >>>> >>>> I suspect such cases are fixable, which would take some work, but on >>>> the other hand we would get a clearer code base as a result anyway. >>>> >>> >>> Sure, but this will be for future version then >>> We want JCasC to support current releases of Jenkins by Praqma customers >>> (and others), not require bleeding edge Jenkins core. >>> >>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>> Groups "Jenkins Developers" group. >>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>>> an email to [email protected]. >>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/CANfRfr03rVj6r1tWfwYeO1QKeDMtDYjuc8fF0Se%2B4Rh9qbZFvg%40mail.gmail.com >>>> . >>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>>> >>> >>> -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Jenkins Developers" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/a60f5c91-d462-4cf0-9e29-9e7319ccc250%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
