I've started testing 2.190 late Friday.  I did not find any immediate
reasons to reject it as the LTS.  The security release scheduled for
Wednesday seems to me like a good reason to prefer choosing 2.190 as a
baseline, then update to the security release as the baseline after it is
delivered.

I haven't investigated the startup failures reported in JENKINS-58912 and
JENKINS-58938.

I'm also concerned about JENKINS-58692 from the KDE project beginning in
2.186.  Jesse Glick investigated it and was unable to duplicate it.  The
KDE project found a workaround (install the symlinks plugin) and can't
really explore other options because it is their production system.
JENKINS-58692 will affect 2.186 and later, so it seems relevant to
investigate further as a risk to any LTS version we select.

I prefer the upcoming security release as the baseline, but JENKINS-58912
and JENKINS-58938  need investigation before the LTS is released.

Mark Waite

On Mon, Aug 26, 2019 at 6:28 AM Oleg Nenashev <[email protected]>
wrote:

> I would vote for 2.187 as a baseline. FTR
> https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/jenkinsci-dev/oQ8PD1hgYBE for the
> mailing list selection process proposal.
>
> For the anticipated absence of a government meeting, we will be
>> selecting next LTS candidate here, on the mailing list. The conclusion
>> will be wrapped up no longer than Tuesday 27th COB UT
>>
>
> We have a security release on Wednesday. Assuming it is stable, we could
> use it as a baseline.
>
> If we discuss only released versions https://jenkins.io/changelog/#v2.189 has
> a pretty bad community rating. JENKINS-58912
> <https://issues.jenkins-ci.org/browse/JENKINS-58912> / JENKINS-58938
> <https://issues.jenkins-ci.org/browse/JENKINS-58938> looks to be a pretty
> bad regression somewhere, but nobody has investigated the issue so far. It
> is not clear when and why it happens. I am not sure we are safe to go into
> LTS with it. So 2.187 is my preference (2.188 was burned)
>
> BR, Oleg
>
>
> On Monday, August 26, 2019 at 11:00:47 AM UTC+2, ogondza wrote:
>>
>> For the anticipated absence of a government meeting, we will be
>> selecting next LTS candidate here, on the mailing list. The conclusion
>> will be wrapped up no longer than Tuesday 27th COB UTC time. Feel free
>> to share your thoughts here.
>>
>> ---
>>
>> I believe we affectively only have 2 candidates[1], 2.189 and 2.190.
>> Since 2.190 has relatively few changes in it, all minor, got 2 weeks of
>> soaking with nothing but positive community feedback, I vote to choose
>> that despite being the latest weekly published.
>>
>> [1] https://jenkins.io/changelog/
>>
>> --
>> oliver
>>
> --
> 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/2577f42d-5a15-4995-b5f8-a97de6a60fe7%40googlegroups.com
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/2577f42d-5a15-4995-b5f8-a97de6a60fe7%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
> .
>


-- 
Thanks!
Mark Waite

-- 
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/CAO49JtGF6tysTgmQ4whw%3DEgBaj4POMoCkwipVGpLXrt3axdkyA%40mail.gmail.com.

Reply via email to