That's in 2.189 from https://github.com/jenkinsci/jenkins/pull/4124
On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 10:17 AM Mark Waite <mark.earl.wa...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Matt, > > Which Jenkins weekly is the first version that includes plugin install > batching? > > On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 11:11 AM Matt Sicker <msic...@cloudbees.com> wrote: >> >> I'd really love to see the plugin install batching feature integrated >> into LTS as that comes up a _lot_ during local testing, especially >> whenever I work on security fixes for Jenkins as we use LTS branches >> for development there. >> >> On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 6:09 AM Mark Waite <mark.earl.wa...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> > I hope to spend some hours investigating those two after work today >> > (JENKINS-58938 and JENKINS-58912). I'm traveling so have less access to >> > my environment, but will spend some time trying to duplicate the issue and >> > identify the change which caused it. >> > >> > 2.187 seems reasonable, assuming the security fix is backported. Would >> > the fix to those two issues be a critical factor in choosing 2.190 >> > instead? 2.190 does not have remoting 3.34, so it avoids that regression. >> > >> > On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 6:00 AM Oleg Nenashev <o.v.nenas...@gmail.com> >> > wrote: >> >> >> >> For me 2.187 is a default pick. If somebody investigates JENKINS-58912 / >> >> JENKINS-58938 and clarifies impact/possibility of a fix for .1, then I am >> >> fine with 190. Cannot commit to investigate it unfortunately >> >> >> >> There are some reasons to want 2.190. Apart from emoji support for job >> >> names (yey!) there are some more meaningful changes like plugin >> >> installation parallelization for Setup Wizard (Jenkins Startup >> >> Experience), security hardening, install-plugin fixes, and other changes >> >> which could help LTS users. >> >> >> >> On Tuesday, August 27, 2019 at 11:50:34 AM UTC+2, ogondza wrote: >> >>> >> >>> 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 <o.v.n...@gmail.com >> >>> > <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 jenkin...@googlegroups.com <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 jenkin...@googlegroups.com >> >>> > <mailto:jenkinsci-dev+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com>. >> >>> > 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 jenkinsci-dev+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >> >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/f36d1d5c-4d1d-42a2-bdfe-f364fea457c2%40googlegroups.com. >> > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > 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 jenkinsci-dev+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >> > To view this discussion on the web visit >> > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/CAO49JtGeGsjwX7vfYBFuVfNNEfgEUk8sVAmcNqZS5%3DmifGAiNg%40mail.gmail.com. >> >> >> >> -- >> Matt Sicker >> Senior Software Engineer, CloudBees >> >> -- >> 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 jenkinsci-dev+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/CAEot4oxEuFJm1%2BqqufyTcbduw9ZLyUW3a4qz_bk1w5%2BZ%3DFjNdQ%40mail.gmail.com. > > > > -- > 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 jenkinsci-dev+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/CAO49JtGSU1sLaq0Nf9h5ZEVZ76HEOENj2jUyYn5iGzodxydoZw%40mail.gmail.com. -- Matt Sicker Senior Software Engineer, CloudBees -- 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 jenkinsci-dev+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/CAEot4oy55RoNjtmeam8nhhOXYuQ2QBSfKt30kQi_48591b2M1w%40mail.gmail.com.
