On Mon, Aug 6, 2018 at 6:11 AM Oleg Nenashev <[email protected]> wrote: > The only outstanding comment is "YAGNI" from Jesse, but I believe that the > reference implementations justify it a bit.
So I see that https://github.com/jenkinsci/jep/blob/master/jep/309/README.adoc#prototype-implementation lists Evergreen as a consumer, yet https://github.com/jenkins-infra/evergreen/blob/master/services/essentials.yaml is not really ready for use; together with the `ingest-update-center` script that processes it, it looks like a throwaway implementation, and as I found in PR #144, it does not support JEP-305 adequately and does not properly manage transitive dependencies. I have proposed ways to fix `essentials.yaml` so that it would actually serve the needs of Evergreen, but it is not clear the resulting format would still match whatever is being proposed in JEP-309. As to `essentialsTest`, IIUC this is a usage of `custom-war-packager`, rather than a separate client. So if Evergreen is indeed fixed at some point by reworking the format of this YAML file, that leaves CWP as the only direct consumer of the BOM, making it not be an intetrchange format. Even if Evergreen can productively use the same format as the JEP currently specifies, it is not apparent to me why we care: there seems to be no overlap in use case between the YAML file stored in the Evergreen repository, to define what is pushed to production, and the YAML files used now in a few plugins to request integration tests during PR builds. -- 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/CANfRfr09_dhT%3D6ataL2iMF%3D7sGex49a%3DR6hbNn50-x3wGCrJ%2BA%40mail.gmail.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
