Re: Preparing your modules/library/plugin to be consumed by dependabot

On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 12:50 PM 'Gavin Mogan' via Jenkins Developers wrote: > I strongly recommend at least setting up project > scm > url For example, when using an archetype (recommended):

Re: Preparing your modules/library/plugin to be consumed by dependabot

+1 > On Aug 27, 2019, at 9:50 AM, 'Gavin Mogan' via Jenkins Developers > wrote: > > Hey Ya'll, > > tl;dr - Make sure project > scm > url is set to github, (example > https://github.com/jenkinsci/configuration-as-code-plugin/blob/master/pom.xml#L41 > >

Re: Hosting process

+1 I like the idea of not having to contact support to break the link On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 10:01 AM Slide wrote: > Based on some feedback from various people during plugin hosting requests, > our current method of forking and renaming repositories is not as desirable > as one might hope. I

Hosting process

Based on some feedback from various people during plugin hosting requests, our current method of forking and renaming repositories is not as desirable as one might hope. I am thinking of creating a JEP to change the process, but wanted to solicit some feedback before I do so. I would like to

Preparing your modules/library/plugin to be consumed by dependabot

Hey Ya'll, tl;dr - Make sure project > scm > url is set to github, (example https://github.com/jenkinsci/configuration-as-code-plugin/blob/master/pom.xml#L41 ) --- I thought I'd share my limited findings with all of your. A couple weeks ago I contacted dependabot support to try and find out why

Re: Impact of BOM on plugin versions

On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 11:09 AM Matt Sicker wrote: > I've made two new releases for credentials since then (2.2.1 and > 2.3.0, the latter of which was released just yesterday). …which may have broken something, by the way: https://github.com/jenkinsci/bom/pull/77 > it's somewhat amusing >

Re: Next LTS line selection open. Due 2019-08-27

That's in 2.189 from https://github.com/jenkinsci/jenkins/pull/4124 On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 10:17 AM Mark Waite 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 wrote: >> >> I'd really love

Re: Next LTS line selection open. Due 2019-08-27

Matt, Which Jenkins weekly is the first version that includes plugin install batching? On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 11:11 AM Matt Sicker 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

Re: Next LTS line selection open. Due 2019-08-27

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 wrote: > > I hope to

Re: Impact of BOM on plugin versions

I've made two new releases for credentials since then (2.2.1 and 2.3.0, the latter of which was released just yesterday). Also, I started using that bom in credentials-plugin, so it's somewhat amusing that it imports a dependencyManagement for itself, though it doesn't appear to adversely affect

Re: Replace authorize-project-plugin

On Tuesday, 27 August 2019 09:16:40 UTC+1, ikedam wrote: > > Hi, > > I’m Ikedam, a maintainer of authorize-project-plugin. > https://plugins.jenkins.io/authorize-project > > Authorize-project-plugin doesn’t support features of modern Jenkins, such > as pipelines, multibranch and JCaC. >

Re: Replace authorize-project-plugin

First of all, thank you for thinking about what the project needs, rather than focusing narrowly on fixing problems with an existing design. On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 4:16 AM ikedam wrote: > I believe users want to define permissions not bound to actual specific users > such as those in LDAP, or

Re: Request to be made maintainer of ant-plugin

On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 8:54 AM Oleg Nenashev wrote: > a default assignee for the component As always, I prefer there to be no default assignee for a JIRA component. It is not a helpful concept IMO. If and when I decide to tackle an issue, I will assign it to myself. -- You received this

Re: Request to be made maintainer of ant-plugin

Permissions have been transferred. Jesse and Francisco, could you please agree about a default assignee for the component? On Friday, August 23, 2019 at 7:21:22 PM UTC+2, Jesse Glick wrote: > > On Fri, Aug 23, 2019 at 5:25 AM Francisco Javier Fernandez > > wrote: > > I would be interested in

Re: Next LTS line selection open. Due 2019-08-27

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

Re: Next LTS line selection open. Due 2019-08-27

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

Re: Next LTS line selection open. Due 2019-08-27

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

Re: Next LTS line selection open. Due 2019-08-27

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: > >

Replace authorize-project-plugin

Hi, I’m Ikedam, a maintainer of authorize-project-plugin. https://plugins.jenkins.io/authorize-project Authorize-project-plugin doesn’t support features of modern Jenkins, such as pipelines, multibranch and JCaC. Making things worse, authorize-project-plugin is the only implementation for