Next LTS baseline

It is time to select the next LTS baseline. Based on the results from the weekly ratings, I believe that Jenkins 2.361 is the best choice for the baseline. The folders plugin will need to have a pull request merged for the project configuration form improvements. I think that we have enough

Re: maven-jellydoc-plugin and maven-stapler-plugin

it makes sense to me. +1. Le ven. 29 juil. 2022 à 07:48, Ullrich Hafner a écrit : > +1 > > > Am 29.07.2022 um 00:49 schrieb Basil Crow : > > > > I would like to request a transfer of > > https://github.com/kohsuke/maven-jellydoc-plugin from the kohsuke > > GitHub organization to the jenkinsci

Re: maven-jellydoc-plugin and maven-stapler-plugin

+1 On Friday, 29 July 2022 at 11:00:55 UTC+2 adrien.lec...@gmail.com wrote: > it makes sense to me. +1. > > Le ven. 29 juil. 2022 à 07:48, Ullrich Hafner a > écrit : > >> +1 >> >> > Am 29.07.2022 um 00:49 schrieb Basil Crow : >> > >> > I would like to request a transfer of >> >

Re: Next LTS baseline

On Fri, Jul 29, 2022 at 3:52 AM Mark Waite wrote: > The folders plugin will need to have a pull request merged for the project > configuration form improvements. I think that we have enough time before the > LTS release for that pull request to be completed and merged. Folders

Re: maven-jellydoc-plugin and maven-stapler-plugin

Adding Kohsuke to the thread. Kohsuke, could you please transfer https://github.com/kohsuke/maven-jellydoc-plugin from the kohsuke GitHub organization to the jenkinsci GitHub organization? See the discussion linked below for the justification and community approval. Many thanks in advance!

Re: Next LTS baseline

+1 for 2.361 It's worth to mention that 2.361 contains several regression fixes too, which you don't want to miss out. On Friday, 29 July 2022 at 18:28:32 UTC+2 m...@basilcrow.com wrote: > On Fri, Jul 29, 2022 at 3:52 AM Mark Waite wrote: > > The folders plugin will need to have a pull

Re: Next LTS baseline

On Fri, Jul 29, 2022 at 7:53 PM Alexander Brandes wrote:+1 for 2.361 > > It's worth to mention that 2.361 contains several regression fixes too, > which you don't want to miss out. > They could always be backported into 2.360.x. So the question to ask is, do we want everything in 2.361? FWIW I

Re: AIX server is showing out of memory post jenkins upgrade.

On Fri, Jul 29, 2022 at 9:02 PM Damodara Devops wrote: > We have upgraded to Jenkins 2.332.3 , post > upgrade all the job ran on AIX server is showing 'out of memory'. > All the jobs are running fine before the upgrade. > Would like to know if any one have come across

AIX server is showing out of memory post jenkins upgrade.

We have upgraded to Jenkins 2.332.3 , post upgrade all the job ran on AIX server is showing 'out of memory'. All the jobs are running fine before the upgrade. Would like to know if any one have come across such issue. And would to know your resolution steps. Thanks

Re: Backporting for LTS 2.346.3 started

Once verified, I think we should consider backporting https://github.com/jenkinsci/remoting/pull/559 to the stable-4.13.x branch of Remoting, cutting a release of Remoting 4.13.3, and including that release in 2.346.3. JENKINS-65873 is a long-standing issue that many users have complained about,