How many people have been able to try this so far?

On Tue 20 Jun 2017 at 14:52, Stephen Connolly <
[email protected]> wrote:

> If you are chomping at the bit, here are all the binaries:
>
> https://www.dropbox.com/sh/47weboatdzus22w/AADNF_aBniOyEeQi9MvM82sMa?dl=0
>
> SHA1 checksums:
> d9c346ac8db497a35825c7dbbb934842a2bc429a  branch-api.hpi
> 16da429f09fb585fd1d744809ee22c8d612fb62c
> cloudbees-bitbucket-branch-source.hpi
> 234fa8eb88dad3241d620bb0116dd12fb9decbba  git.hpi
> a68be01144f3045f81a5cf3c0bc60ad12f39b643  github-branch-source.hpi
> 92237097815b45260bb8b272caa9be9f92eb5085  mercurial.hpi
> 04c321420b3752a8d8b3af89cae1bf5934607b1c  scm-api.hpi
>
> SHA256 checksums:
> 858ce20992c3f179b850c512979999084b11fe7c4c173cf6d4d2e07bbfebf3e7
> branch-api.hpi
> 8ebff7a3ec43df276d4b51d1e5bcb910bbe8eb4cd47a4be0e35f2f2ca1cd0e03
> cloudbees-bitbucket-branch-source.hpi
> 46cbbf11395df4a085829094d5a36dee7328aeba00d33e34b44aa0dcf9898248  git.hpi
> 6495a60f1bf0733d807f412434c6c2e24b7bba53fd7ce348ca5319ef38571f20
> github-branch-source.hpi
> 173d12042fe8582efdb52e740f4e939b9daa05f181c6aaff31824337d519a31c
> mercurial.hpi
> 9b58e9e6d13ce90a91b73f38142bf0977f244df9c52b948988f9d5bdc3785481
> scm-api.hpi
>
> -Stephen
>
> On 20 June 2017 at 14:29, Stephen Connolly <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
>> OK! Here we are... testing time!
>>
>> These are the plugins that are being covered: (download links should be
>> live in an hour or two)
>>
>> scm-api 2.2.0-alpha-1
>> https://updates.jenkins.io/download/plugins/scm-api/2.2.0-alpha-1/scm-api.hpi
>> branch-api 2.0.11-alpha-1
>> https://updates.jenkins.io/download/plugins/branch-api/2.0.11-alpha-1/branch-api.hpi
>> git 3.4.0-alpha-1
>> https://updates.jenkins.io/download/plugins/git/3.4.0-alpha-1/git.hpi
>> mercurial 2.0-alpha-1
>> https://updates.jenkins.io/download/plugins/mercurial/2.0-alpha-1/mercurial.hpi
>> github-branch-source 2.2.0-alpha-1
>> https://updates.jenkins.io/download/plugins/github-branch-source/2.2.0-alpha-1/github-branch-source.hpi
>> cloudbees-bitbucket-branch-source 2.2.0-alpha-1
>> https://updates.jenkins.io/download/plugins/cloudbees-bitbucket-branch-source/2.2.0-alpha-1/cloudbees-bitbucket-branch-source.hpi
>>
>> Recommended testing procedure:
>>
>> 1. Set up a throw-away Jenkins running a version similar to your
>> production environment *with the pre-upgrade versions of the plugins you
>> are using*.
>> 2. Set up ideally at least one organization folder and one standalone
>> multibranch project building your source code - to a first order you do not
>> care if the builds succeed or fail, only that the branches are found.
>> 3. Trigger a scan / index of your organization folders and standalone
>> multibranch projects.
>> 4. Wait for the queue to complete
>> 5. Run the script in the system script console:
>> https://gist.github.com/stephenc/64ef58783b4438a126ad4e3f43062df1 and
>> save the output to smoke-pre-upgrade.txt
>> 6. Upgrade the relevant plugins, restart Jenkins.
>> 7. Run the script in the system script console:
>> https://gist.github.com/stephenc/64ef58783b4438a126ad4e3f43062df1 and
>> save the output to smoke-post-upgrade.txt
>> 8. Trigger a scan / index of your organization folders and standalone
>> multibranch projects.
>> 9. Wait for the queue to complete
>> 10. Run the script in the system script console:
>> https://gist.github.com/stephenc/64ef58783b4438a126ad4e3f43062df1 and
>> save the output to smoke-post-rescan.txt
>>
>> At this point, do a diff between smoke-pre-upgrade.txt and
>> smoke-post-rescan.txt
>>
>> You are looking for three classes of difference:
>>
>> a. branch jobs that have been rebuilt for no reason (i.e. the revision is
>> the same)
>> b. branch jobs that have disappeared for no good reason (i.e. the branch
>> is still present in the backing scm)
>> c. branch jobs that have suddenly appeared for no good reason (i.e. the
>> branch was there before but not found) [expecting some of these for
>> BitBucket PRs from forks, but only after configuration updated, saved and
>> another rescan performed]
>>
>> My expectation is that nobody will have these kinds of issues.
>>
>> Also try out the new UI to see what you think.
>>
>> Please report back your testing results either way. Don't forget to
>> report back your UI feedback too ;-)
>>
>> After doing that test in a throw-away Jenkins, you can *optionally*
>> repeat the test on a *more* production*-like* (emphasis on being
>> production-like not production) instance... but this is code that has not
>> yet completed code review (hence -alpha-1 not -beta-1) so it is at your own
>> risk. There are additional issues to be aware when using more
>> production-like environment:
>>
>> a. You may have builds that were assuming branches were full clones, now
>> the refspec is tightly reduced to minimize clone time. If you need a full
>> clone you will need to add the "Advanced Clone" behaviour.
>> b. Mercurial repositories on Bitbucket Cloud do not support merge commits
>> for PR building (yet)
>> c. Credential domains were not being correctly compared so as a result -
>> if you are using credential domains to help sort credentials - there may be
>> cases where the credentials are now searched for in a different domain than
>> you had them in, so your domains may need reconfiguration to have the
>> credentials found by the multibranch project / org folder.
>> d. The pipeline snippitizer is generating $class style for some of the
>> GitHub and BitBucket specific behaviours, this is because my plan is to
>> further consolidate the implementations and have a single shared
>> implementation of each for these plugins, that way they can have a single
>> @Symbol annotation... if that is too difficult then the @Symbol would need
>> to be prefixed with gitHub / bitbucket respectively, e.g. gitHubBranches,
>> bitbucketBranches for the discover branches behaviour.
>>
>>
>> Thanks in advance
>>
>> -Stephen
>>
>> On 18 June 2017 at 15:53, Michael Kobit <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> I may be able to help with this as well.
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jun 16, 2017, 17:28 Dan Tran <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I will give it a spin too.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks
>>>>
>>>> -Dan
>>>>
>>>> On Friday, June 16, 2017 at 11:57:26 AM UTC-7, Kevin Burnett wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> we'd be down to try that, yes. thanks for making these changes in a
>>>>> way that will benefit the product long-term!
>>>>>
>>>>> fingers are crossed that there's already a built-in way to pretend
>>>>> like pull requests don't exist! you're already building the branches; why
>>>>> also build the pull requests, eh? :)
>>>>>
>>>>> thanks!
>>>>> kb
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Friday, June 16, 2017 at 2:35:54 PM UTC-4, Mark Waite wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'd like to be part of the beta test.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Mark Waite
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Fri, Jun 16, 2017 at 12:19 PM Stephen Connolly <
>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Just a quick status update.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In final stages of this work now. Bobby is being a superstar and
>>>>>>> reviewing my 13k LoC change on the Bitbucket branch source - brings 
>>>>>>> lots of
>>>>>>> feature parity with GitHub and adds the configuration ability of the 
>>>>>>> pure
>>>>>>> Git branch source
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I am finalising the GitHub Branch Source changes... likely to be
>>>>>>> another big PR
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Then there's a 5k LoC change in the Git plugin
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Plan is to try and get all merged next week and cut a beta
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'll be looking for people to help test at that stage.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Please respond if you think you can help (lots of bugs fixed as a
>>>>>>> side effect of the refactoring - it makes things more easy to test => I
>>>>>>> found and fixed bugs)
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Sent from my phone
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> 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/CA%2BnPnMxfYrZphgYDXFD3i%2Bo_7eDn7mn2qVrzJz6wFaoVkNmc%2Bw%40mail.gmail.com
>>>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/CA%2BnPnMxfYrZphgYDXFD3i%2Bo_7eDn7mn2qVrzJz6wFaoVkNmc%2Bw%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>>>>>>> .
>>>>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>>> Groups "Jenkins Users" 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-users/5dd15ac2-b8a2-4ebd-bb4a-3bffa4815227%40googlegroups.com
>>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-users/5dd15ac2-b8a2-4ebd-bb4a-3bffa4815227%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>>>> .
>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>>>
>>> --
>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>> Groups "Jenkins Users" 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-users/CALELY9GHbX4WuHdDKM8-bU1xR5voh-NsfHeQXNAxMjJpXkiwrw%40mail.gmail.com
>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-users/CALELY9GHbX4WuHdDKM8-bU1xR5voh-NsfHeQXNAxMjJpXkiwrw%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>>> .
>>>
>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>>
>>
>>
> --
Sent from my phone

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Jenkins Users" 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-users/CA%2BnPnMz1NimOSn1UYZyjwZ4KFEiDFoHf6L9Wy7Q3vyDb6959-Q%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to