Thanks. Reverting JENKINS-14351 as the fix for JENKINS-19192 is bright new.
--
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
On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 7:09 AM, ogondza ogon...@gmail.com wrote:
Reverting JENKINS-14351
Pity (since this is an important fix for people using many Unix
platforms), but can be deferred to 1.509.4.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Jenkins Developers
On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 2:34 AM, oliver gondža ogon...@redhat.com wrote:
JENKINS-14351 Outdated JRuby libs
Looks like you will need to also backport a fix of a regression this introduced:
https://issues.jenkins-ci.org/browse/JENKINS-19192
--
You received this message because you are subscribed
I assume we do not want to wait two weeks with 1.509.3 until stapler 1.217
became soaked. Besides, using stapler 1.217 in Jenkins seems to introduce
new regression [1].
It seems that JENKINS-18776 is the only thing to revert it we want to stay
on 1.207. So I vote for pushing it to 1.509.4 that
On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 8:06 AM, ogondza ogon...@gmail.com wrote:
It seems that JENKINS-18776 is the only thing to revert it we want to stay
on 1.207. So I vote for pushing it to 1.509.4 that would use new fixed
stapler so we can backport JENKINS-18776 and JENKINS-14362.
I agree this seems
On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 6:05 PM, Daniel Beck m...@beckweb.net wrote:
Please note that JENKINS-8856 isn't closed, but Kohsuke's diagnostic addition
qualifies for LTS.
Any thoughts on whether
https://issues.jenkins-ci.org/browse/JENKINS-8856 can go into 1.509.3?
The proposed fixes would I guess
On Tue, Aug 6, 2013 at 5:37 AM, Stephen Connolly
stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com wrote:
My vote though is to try and get the 3.1 support into the 1.509.3 LTS... or
worst case 1.509.4.
Consensus on the meeting seemed to be to push this out to 1.509.4. I
committed a small change to the stable
On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 8:01 AM, oliver gondža ogon...@redhat.com wrote:
@jesse: Is JENKINS-14362 really resolved? This discussion seems inconclusive
to me.
There is no definitive verification in JIRA, though I have heard
private reports from people trying backport builds that the problem
did
I don't use Maven at all but I'd think that introducing a new feature like
Maven 3.1 support would be something for a main release not a point release.
Richard.
On Tue, Aug 6, 2013 at 8:51 PM, ogondza ogon...@gmail.com wrote:
The change is really huge and to me support for maven 3.1 sounds
AFAIK this is an issue confined to the (IMHO crappy) Maven project type.
You can build Maven 3.1 based projects quite happily with a Free-style
project and a Maven Build step.
The reason I raise this is that the context of this change is thus a lot
smaller. It only affects one project type, so it
From all the alternatives
- not including the fix for JENKINS-18776 in 1.509.1
- reverting the bug in stapler, releasing it and using blending edge
stapler in LTS Jenkins
- or backporting necessary fix and using stapler 1.207.1
I prefer the last one but the decision is on you and Kohsuke.
On Tue, Aug 6, 2013 at 12:22 PM, ogondza ogon...@gmail.com wrote:
the decision is on you and Kohsuke
I agree that this seems like the safest approach. BTW only Kohsuke can
do Stapler releases last I checked.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Jenkins
Hi,
AFAIK this is an issue confined to the (IMHO crappy) Maven project type.
IMHO the main issue is that backporting bigger changes done on top of the
trunk could be quite tricky and even if the code can be compiled, you can
easily break something - this backport e.g. requires also changes in
Hello Oliver,
We have big issues in production with this one
here: https://issues.jenkins-ci.org/browse/JENKINS-17553
Our Jenkins-Master is growing and growing. Since I updated to 1.509.2 we
need about 2,5 times more space for $JENKINS_HOME/jobs.
Could you please add this one to 1.509.3?
On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 7:44 AM, imase igor.ma...@gmail.com wrote:
https://issues.jenkins-ci.org/browse/JENKINS-17553
Could you please add this one to 1.509.3?
Is this distinct from
https://issues.jenkins-ci.org/browse/JENKINS-17508
which was already backported? There are four linked issues,
Hi,
The backports was pushed into upstream stable branch. See [1]. 7
candidates pending.
[1]
https://ci.jenkins-ci.org/view/Jenkins%20core/job/jenkins_lts_branch/95/
--
oliver
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Jenkins
Developers group.
To
Check also JENKINS-15587 which was fixed a while ago but which the
JIRA link daemon apparently forgot about.
--
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
Am 02.08.2013 17:18, schrieb Jesse Glick:
I brought this up earlier on the list but I am not sure anyone
responded, so just checking again: do we want to update war/pom.xml to
use the latest released versions of all bundled plugins? (As of some
cutoff date of course, so that you can do testing
I've just flagged https://issues.jenkins-ci.org/browse/JENKINS-15935
cannot build with Maven 3.1.0
This doesn't satisfy the 1-week battle condition, yet (will so on
Monday), but IMO it would be definitely good, if we support the current
Maven release.
Cheers
Christoph
Am 02.08.2013 08:34,
Hi,
I have backported[2] all soaked LTS candidates into my clone of a stable
branch[1]. Couple of issues/commits had to be backported as well even
though not flagged as lts-candidate as they ware required by flagged
backports.[3]
Bundled test and selenium test are all happy. Unless there
Hello Oliver,
Is it applicable to propose bugfix to be back-ported if it has not been
merged to master branch yet?
I'm very interested to have fix for
JENKINS-19017https://issues.jenkins-ci.org/browse/JENKINS-19017(Jenkins
merges queued builds with different file parameters) in the new
LTS
Hi Oleg,
Is it applicable to propose bugfix to be back-ported if it has not been
merged to master branch yet?
no, we backport only fixes which are already in mainline for some time, see
[1]:
Changes to this branch will be restricted to backported cherry-picked changes
from the trunk that
On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 4:43 AM, Vojtech Juranek vjura...@redhat.com wrote:
Changes to this branch will be restricted to backported cherry-picked changes
from the trunk that are battle-tested — meaning those commits that have
already been a part of a main line release for more than a week.
For
I brought this up earlier on the list but I am not sure anyone
responded, so just checking again: do we want to update war/pom.xml to
use the latest released versions of all bundled plugins? (As of some
cutoff date of course, so that you can do testing on the whole
package.)
--
You received this
On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 2:34 AM, oliver gondža ogon...@redhat.com wrote:
4ade2ba7df and cb96d23252 Needed by JENKINS-17715
I think this was included by mistake. @domi marked this lts-candidate
yet the feature which introduced this regression was only added in
1.512. I suggest the lts-candidate
On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 2:34 AM, oliver gondža ogon...@redhat.com wrote:
JENKINS-18654 DependencyClassLoader#getTransitiveDependencies returns
disabled plugins
Careful; this might have introduced JENKINS-18922 (still under investigation).
--
You received this message because you are
Jesse,
The tags are in place. Maintaining a list of lts-candidates that has not
been backported yet seems like an overkill to me. I was about to label the
issues lts-1.509.3-fixed when they get merged to jenkinsci:stable. I do not
mind labelling issues as fixed right away when backported to my
On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 12:03 PM, ogondza ogon...@gmail.com wrote:
I do not
mind labelling issues as fixed right away when backported to my repo so jira
filter would work as we want (showing only issues yet to backport).
Yes, that was my intent; I think we can optimistically assume that
what is
Hi,
what about JENKINS-18660? The issue was fixed on July 8th but accidentally left
open.
Regards,
Daniel
On 02.08.2013, at 08:34, oliver gondža ogon...@redhat.com wrote:
Hi,
I have backported[2] all soaked LTS candidates into my clone of a stable
branch[1]. Couple of issues/commits had
Hi,
Provided there are any other bugs you would like to have backported, flag
them now.
Another suggestion:
Diagnostic output for JENKINS-8856 was added to remoting in 1.521 [1]. I
labeled it lts-candidate because the information provided can help admins in
determining that something might
I have started relabelling with lts-1.509.3-fixed. Candidates to go
https://issues.jenkins-ci.org/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?mode=hiderequestId=12146
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Jenkins Developers group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop
Please note that JENKINS-8856 isn't closed, but Kohsuke's diagnostic addition
qualifies for LTS.
In fast, getting the diagnostic into LTS is probably sufficient to close this
issue, as any further occurrences of the StreamCorruptedException on LTS or
1.521+ would then include additional
32 matches
Mail list logo
