JEP-223 - Create a new "Limited Administer" permission named "Configure" for
managing non-security aspects of a Jenkins instance
(https://github.com/jenkinsci/jep/tree/master/jep/223) has been accepted as
a draft.
Our proposal from last month now has an official JEP XXX number and is
Marky,
Thanks for always having such a positive attitude! It's very contagious!
This community it a great one, people helping other people is one of the
biggest draws to open source for me.
Thanks for your kind words
Alex
On Thu, Jan 9, 2020, 16:57 Marky Jackson wrote:
> I feel community is
I feel community is more than just the cool tech that is built. It is also
the community which builds it.
I equally feel that when the community goes above and beyond to help
another member it should not go unnoticed.
Gavin Mogan (aka @halkeye) and Alex Earl (aka @slide) went above and beyond
On Thu, Jan 9, 2020 at 1:10 PM Felix Queiruga wrote:
> The branch can be found at
> https://github.com/fqueiruga/jenkins/tree/replace-jsbuilder-with-webpack.
> Keep in mind that it is a WIP
You may want to file it as a draft PR—get early CI and have a place
for early review comments to be
Redoing my reply as I answered from my mail client.
The change will be self contained and limited to the Jenkins core war,
Jesse. That said, maybe it requires more explaining and documentation than
a normal enhancement PR.
The PR will replace js-builder completely. LESS files will also be
Sweet I was going to suggest the same thing..
Lots of plugin maintainers don't realize they are not "watching" a repo.
and I think tools like pr bot don't count you unless your listed as a
reviewer
So much +1 for me
On Thu., Jan. 9, 2020, 6:29 a.m. Oleg Nenashev,
wrote:
> Perfect, this makes
The change will be self contained and limited to the Jenkins core war,
Jesse. That said, maybe it requires more explaining and documentation than
a normal enhancement PR.
My branch can be found at
https://github.com/fqueiruga/jenkins/tree/replace-jsbuilder-with-webpack.
Keep in mind that it is a
I'm super curious about your plans for this. Are you just doing js or doing
CSS too? Is your branch public anywhere?
On Thu., Jan. 9, 2020, 9:26 a.m. Felix Queiruga,
wrote:
> Hi everybody,
>
> I have a working draft for replacing js-builder with webpack on Jenkins
> core (not on plugins). The
Normal jira sounds fine to me,
Webpack is a very standard front end tool these days
On Thu, 9 Jan 2020 at 17:26, Felix Queiruga wrote:
> Hi everybody,
>
> I have a working draft for replacing js-builder with webpack on Jenkins
> core (not on plugins). The branch is a WIP, it's only missing
On Thu, Jan 9, 2020 at 12:26 PM Felix Queiruga wrote:
> I'd like to know if this toolchain change should be first explained on a JEP
> or if a normal JIRA ticket is enough.
I do not know of any official policy but my rule of thumb is that you
should file a JEP if there would be lots of content
Hi everybody,
I have a working draft for replacing js-builder with webpack on Jenkins
core (not on plugins). The branch is a WIP, it's only missing adapting JS
unit tests and linter.
Before I submit the draft PR, I'd like to know if this toolchain change
should be first explained on a JEP or
On Fri, Dec 27, 2019 at 7:34 AM Tim Jacomb wrote:
> I’ve seen it work really well elsewhere, k8s has a very large slack community
> with multiple sigs and user groups.
Yes, and it works well in my experience. Jenkins X uses that
workspace, for example, and it was easy to sign up. +1 for using
>
> Perfect, this makes the barrier to acceptance quite low, without forcing a
> change on anyone.
>
Yes, I do not think we are in position to enforce the process at the
moment. Historically Jenkins project gives a lot of freedom to plugin
maintainers to define how they operate, and IMHO it
On Thu, Jan 9, 2020 at 8:05 AM Oleg Nenashev wrote:
> We add CODEOWNERS template to plugin archetypes
Yes, though we need to do JENKINS-58557 first.
> We submit pull requests […]
> Each plugin maintainer or maintainer team will decide on their own whether
> they accept the process or not.
+! from me. I like that idea very much.
On Thu, Jan 9, 2020 at 6:05 AM Oleg Nenashev wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I propose to improve the code review process across the Jenkins GitHub
> organization. TL;DR: Let's introduce CODEOWNERS in repositories and
> automatically request reviews from maintainer
Hi all,
I propose to improve the code review process across the Jenkins GitHub
organization. TL;DR: Let's introduce CODEOWNERS in repositories and
automatically request reviews from maintainer teams.
*Motivation:* In a number of plugins we have issues with pull requests
which do not get timely
On Wed, Jan 8, 2020 at 3:49 PM Rick wrote:
> For many users, they download Jenkins first, then select some plugins and
> config them. It might take a lot of time, like hours. But if we can get a
> perfect Jenkins distribution which contains all we need, it can save that
> time for us. Yes, I
I am unsure about Jenkins being a bigger one because IMO that would depend
on the infrastructure we use rather that on the limitations of the language.
On Thu, Jan 9, 2020, 7:17 AM Rick wrote:
> I agree with you that Spring boot can be the framework of backend.
>
> start.spring.io is a great
18 matches
Mail list logo
