Re: "Processing environment for ${pluginName}"

> On 12. Sep 2017, at 04:52, Justin Harringa wrote: > > Is this a plugin or Jenkins in general? > Not a dev list question, please ask on the users list (and if you do, include a full list of installed plugins and versions to help the search). -- You received this

"Processing environment for ${pluginName}"

I've been trying to figure out what is spitting out these lines in my console log for a bit. Anyone know off hand what is doing this? My google-foo on GitHub and on the web in general doesn't seem to be coming up with any good results. Is this a plugin or Jenkins in general? Thanks all! Justin

Re: Jenkins 2.73.1 LTS RC testing started

I reported JENKINS-46754 - 2.73.1 RC agent won't start if using ed25519 passphrase protected key and have explored it further. The bug is unrelated to the remoting version. The change which Oliver made (at my request) to switch from remoting

Re: Gave up Copyartifact2.0 / Request new maintainers to improve Copyartifact

On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 12:32 PM, R. Tyler Croy wrote: > Kohsuke's work was > primarily adding @Symbol annotations, which I don't understand how that could > possibly be overkill. That *PR* is not overkill. It is a simple change which I would approve as soon as there are

Re: Gave up Copyartifact2.0 / Request new maintainers to improve Copyartifact

(replies inline) On Mon, 11 Sep 2017, Jesse Glick wrote: > On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 11:44 AM, R. Tyler Croy wrote: > > I would encourage adoption of the Copy Artifact plugin and incorporation of > > Pipeline support into that > > It already works from Pipeline???Tom

Re: Gave up Copyartifact2.0 / Request new maintainers to improve Copyartifact

On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 11:44 AM, R. Tyler Croy wrote: > I would encourage adoption of the Copy Artifact plugin and incorporation of > Pipeline support into that It already works from Pipeline—Tom Fennelly did that two and half years ago. I am just pointing out that it is

Re: Gave up Copyartifact2.0 / Request new maintainers to improve Copyartifact

(replies inline) On Mon, 11 Sep 2017, Jesse Glick wrote: > On Sun, Sep 10, 2017 at 6:38 PM, ikedam wrote: > > There's a pull request to have Copyartifact support pipeline symbol > > expressions [6]. > > I believe it's reasonable to merge, but, on the other hand, I'm afraid

Re: Wiki page seems to be having some kind of caching issues

Thank you. On Monday, September 11, 2017 at 5:51:23 PM UTC+3, Daniel Beck wrote: > > > > On 11. Sep 2017, at 13:29, Daniel Anechitoaie > wrote: > > > > My main concern is that page at > https://plugins.jenkins.io/osf-builder-suite-for-sfcc-deploy does't seem > to get

Re: Wiki page seems to be having some kind of caching issues

> On 11. Sep 2017, at 13:29, Daniel Anechitoaie wrote: > > My main concern is that page at > https://plugins.jenkins.io/osf-builder-suite-for-sfcc-deploy does't seem to > get updated. > https://issues.jenkins-ci.org/browse/WEBSITE-378 has been merged into staging a

Re: Gave up Copyartifact2.0 / Request new maintainers to improve Copyartifact

On Sun, Sep 10, 2017 at 6:38 PM, ikedam wrote: > There's a pull request to have Copyartifact support pipeline symbol > expressions [6]. > I believe it's reasonable to merge, but, on the other hand, I'm afraid it > would result the compatibility issue more serious. Perhaps it

Re: Updating Pipeline Code - Advice request

On Sat, Sep 9, 2017 at 3:31 AM, Richard Bywater wrote: > Whilst looking at a recent question regarding HTML Publisher & Pipelines, I > came across the fact that AbstractStepImpl was being used by HTML Publisher > but perhaps this is an old deprecated approach which isn't used

Re: Wiki page seems to be having some kind of caching issues

Hi, yes, that solves it for me, as it seems the cache is by URL. But what about the plugin site? I don't think https://plugins.jenkins.io/ makes use of suck query strings tricks. I guess they always query just the normal URL. As result https://plugins.jenkins.io/osf-builder-suite-for-sfcc-deploy

Re: Wiki page seems to be having some kind of caching issues

Caching issue? Try adding a fake parameter to the URL. Like "?wat=tf" Le 11 sept. 2017 13:29, "Daniel Anechitoaie" a écrit : > My main concern is that page at https://plugins.jenkins.io/ > osf-builder-suite-for-sfcc-deploy does't seem to get updated. > I made the

Re: Wiki page seems to be having some kind of caching issues

My main concern is that page at https://plugins.jenkins.io/osf-builder-suite-for-sfcc-deploy does't seem to get updated. I made the changes on the wiki page more than 12 hours ago and according to https://wiki.jenkins.io/display/JENKINS/Plugin+Site+Information+for+Plugin+Developers that page

Wiki page seems to be having some kind of caching issues

Any idea what's wrong with following Wiki page https://wiki.jenkins.io/display/JENKINS/OSF+Builder+Suite+For+Salesforce+Commerce+Cloud+Deploy+Plugin ? On "last modified" it always says "less than a minute ago" when I actually edited the page hours ago. Also at the bottom of the page, where

Re: Jira - Confirmed status

> On 11. Sep 2017, at 08:26, Richard Bywater wrote: > > An "ideal" workflow (well, one that is slightly easier to work with) in my > mind would be something like Open->Confirmed->In Progress->Resolved->Closed. > Similarly if it wasn't really an issue, something like

Jira - Confirmed status

A while back there was discussion on possible changes to the Jira workflow which I'm not sure if they got anywhere or not. However whilst I was just triaging some issues on the HTML Publisher component, it occurred to me there is no real way to highlight issues that have just been submitted by