On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 9:47 AM Oleg Nenashev <[email protected]> wrote: > JEP-309 has been already accepted. It would not be possible to fully address > your feedback without introducing a 2.0 BOM version.
Which is why I said on Aug 06 that the JEP seemed premature while the basic problems in how developers publish updates to Evergreen were still being worked out. > I hope that reasoning explains why it was decided to support transitive > dependencies. You mean in the Specification (not Reasoning)? https://github.com/jenkinsci/jep/tree/master/jep/309#dependency-resolution does not specify anything about semantics of transitive dependencies the `spec` section. > Removing "status" would require a breaking change in the format. Yes…breaking to what, exactly? `essentials.yaml` is stored in one repo and processed by one script in the same directory. >> Then for each plugin, add a mandatory boolean `transitive` attribute. > > Not a compatible change Sure, but what concretely is affected by changing the format of `essentials.yaml`? > Although it is not mentioned explicitly, JEP-309 does not prohibit combining > environments if needed. > IMO it is up to the BOM packager implementation My discussion is specifically about what _Evergreen_ does. -- 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/CANfRfr27DW1DqAZnomBZH62RPsHyPTThzzv__O-s702z5zU%3DhA%40mail.gmail.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
