So I guess that eliminates 2.191 as a choice for LTS. I do not feel that strong choosing between 2.190 and 2.187, and it appears Oleg and Mark leans that way.

Any other inputs?

On 27/08/2019 11.15, Oleg Nenashev wrote:
There is a confirmed regression in Jenkins 2.191 / Remoting 3.34
https://issues.jenkins-ci.org/browse/JENKINS-59094

I think it a serious obstacle for this version or for the tomorrow's security fix as a baseline.

BR, Oleg

On Monday, August 26, 2019 at 1:37:18 PM UTC+2, Mark Waite wrote:

    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]
    <javascript:>> wrote:

        I would vote for 2.187 as a baseline. FTR
        https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/jenkinsci-dev/oQ8PD1hgYBE 
<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
        <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] <javascript:>.
        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] <mailto:[email protected]>. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/8346a1c4-ca52-4f6f-b89a-f00bb0eb48e2%40googlegroups.com <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/8346a1c4-ca52-4f6f-b89a-f00bb0eb48e2%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.


--
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/c38516e9-a901-2014-d00a-1fcbcb225af1%40gmail.com.

Reply via email to