Hi all, Could you please tell me if is there a decision about next LTS?
Thanks in advance Bea > El 29 ago 2019, a las 11:46, Oleg Nenashev <[email protected]> escribió: > > Hi Oliver, > > Could you please let us know what is your decision about the LTS baseline? > > Thanks in advance, > Oleg > > On Wednesday, August 28, 2019 at 1:59:11 PM UTC+2, Mark Waite wrote: > +1 from me to choose 2.190 as the baseline. > > On Wednesday, August 28, 2019 at 7:39:31 AM UTC-4, Oleg Nenashev wrote: > Great to see the fix! https://github.com/jenkinsci/jenkins/pull/4176 > <https://github.com/jenkinsci/jenkins/pull/4176> can be trivially backported, > so I think we can go ahead with 2.190 as a baseline. > > BR, Oleg > > > On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 12:54 PM Mark Waite wrote: > > > On Tuesday, August 27, 2019 at 6:00:13 AM UTC-4, Oleg Nenashev wrote: > For me 2.187 is a default pick. If somebody investigates JENKINS-58912 > <https://www.google.com/url?q=https%3A%2F%2Fissues.jenkins-ci.org%2Fbrowse%2FJENKINS-58912&sa=D&sntz=1&usg=AFQjCNG-zP4KRD2k95IS6rp2N1UtzSnNPw> > / JENKINS-58938 <https://issues.jenkins-ci.org/browse/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. > > > Gabriel Lavoie has submitted a pull request to fix those two issues. The > pull request is at https://github.com/jenkinsci/jenkins/pull/4176 > <https://github.com/jenkinsci/jenkins/pull/4176> and is related to the slow > trigger monitor that was first released in 2.189. > > I haven't yet been able to interactively verify the problem myself, but am > thrilled that Gabriel was able to do so and that a pull request has been > submitted. > > That change leads me towards favoring 2.187, before that admin monitor was > added. I could be persuaded otherwise (especially considering the security > fix that was announced for today), assuming we also have a fix for the > remoting issue that was reported as > https://issues.jenkins-ci.org/browse/JENKINS-59094 > <https://issues.jenkins-ci.org/browse/JENKINS-59094> > > Mark Waite > > 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 > > <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> > > <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> > > <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 > > <https://issues.jenkins-ci.org/browse/JENKINS-58912>> / > > JENKINS-58938 > > <https://issues.jenkins-ci.org/browse/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/ > > <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> > > > > > > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/2577f42d-5a15-4995-b5f8-a97de6a60fe7%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer > > > > <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> > > > > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/8346a1c4-ca52-4f6f-b89a-f00bb0eb48e2%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer > > > > <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 a topic in the Google > Groups "Jenkins Developers" group. > To unsubscribe from this topic, visit > https://groups.google.com/d/topic/jenkinsci-dev/FM8_kG1kdw8/unsubscribe > <https://groups.google.com/d/topic/jenkinsci-dev/FM8_kG1kdw8/unsubscribe>. > To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to > [email protected] <javascript:>. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/dfd3af58-7ed1-4849-8cd1-0c55ff9010a3%40googlegroups.com > > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/dfd3af58-7ed1-4849-8cd1-0c55ff9010a3%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>. > > -- > 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/3e3f2c23-1089-4230-b54d-9dfa3ed2b146%40googlegroups.com > > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/3e3f2c23-1089-4230-b54d-9dfa3ed2b146%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>. -- 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/0AC2CCF3-FF69-4ABC-BA16-C86FD51AE95C%40cloudbees.com.
