Re: [Heads-up] Removing commons-digester from Jenkins Core (and the link with our plugins EOL policy discussion :-))

Here's the PR submitting JEP for Digester Removal: https://github.com/jenkinsci/jep/pull/361 On Wed, May 5, 2021 at 10:37 AM Oleg Nenashev wrote: > Hi all. Please do not consider JEP as a huge overhead. As discussed in > another thread, we will be working on simplifying the process for >

Re: [jenkins-infra] Should we bring back wiki.jenkins.io?

> > Please no, wiki's suck for quality documentation. > +1000 On Thu, May 6, 2021 at 6:57 AM Tim Jacomb wrote: > Please no, wiki's suck for quality documentation. > > Anyone can put whatever rubbish they want there. > > On Thu, 6 May 2021 at 14:41, 'Olblak' via Jenkins Infrastructure < >

Re: JEPs & BDFL ~ KK

make changes without PRs. -L. On Wed, May 5, 2021 at 11:30 AM Liam Newman wrote: > I can't attend the governance meeting but I'm +1 on the changes we've > discussed. > > On Tue, May 4, 2021 at 1:09 PM Oleg Nenashev > wrote: > >> Thanks! I will create a pull request for the

Re: JEPs & BDFL ~ KK

I can't attend the governance meeting but I'm +1 on the changes we've discussed. On Tue, May 4, 2021 at 1:09 PM Oleg Nenashev wrote: > Thanks! I will create a pull request for the JEP tomorrow. No laptop at > the moment > > On Tue, May 4, 2021, 21:44 Liam Newman wrote: > >

Re: [Heads-up] Removing commons-digester from Jenkins Core (and the link with our plugins EOL policy discussion :-))

Daniel, >From that link: > This is not to say we don’t ever remove anything, but we do it very > carefully. > We are being careful. I think creating a JEP, even a mostly retrospective one, is worth doing. If nothing else we should do so because of concerns like those voiced by Daniel. I will

Re: JEPs & BDFL ~ KK

Maybe >>> a one-time term change would be less confusing for 3rd parties in the >>> future. >>> >>> For "Reviewer", this is not exactly what I propose. IMO every interested >>> party is expected to review a JEP. The job of the suggested "spo

Re: JEPs & BDFL ~ KK

e suggested "sponsor" role > is to help the authors with the process and with getting the required > community feedback, not necessarily to review the entire JEP and technical > merits on their own. > > Oleg, perhaps you could submit a PR (or more than one) with proposed >>

Re: JEPs & BDFL ~ KK

As one of the "Sponsors" of JEP-1, I should probably weigh in. I support streamlining the JEP process any way the community sees fit to do. Removing the BDFL and BDFL Delegate, replacing them with the Governance Board certainly makes sense at this point. Howver, I don't like changing the

Re: Optional automated source code formatting - prep for JEP

Thanks you two, for clearly describing the issue that I'm attempting to address. I've updated https://github.com/jenkinsci/github-branch-source-plugin/pull/392 with the following changes: - Source will not be changed during the build unless the user runs a specific maven goal -

Re: Forked repositories in GitHub

+1000 On Tue, Aug 18, 2020 at 3:20 PM Ullrich Hafner wrote: > +1 from me as well > > Am 18.08.2020 um 16:30 schrieb Matt Sicker : > > +1 here, especially due to GitHub tooling and apps. > > On Tue, Aug 18, 2020 at 8:13 AM Mark Waite > wrote: > >> +1 from me. >> >> On Tuesday, August 18, 2020

Re: ANN: Jenkins release artifacts uploads blockage on June 09, and a temporary downloads issue

I have two releases that I consider high-priority: github-branch-source and github-api . Users have been able to rollback to the previous release to unblock themselves, but people who cannot rollback (new installations) remain blocked. On Friday, June 12, 2020 at 10:05:33 AM UTC-7, Oleg

Re: Prevent building branches/PRs existing before the first branch indexing (Branch API plugin)

Adam, I think the feature/behavior you're suggesting is definitely worth implementing. It would let people safely create new projects without dealing with build storms. So to reiterate - the behavior we're looking for is: 1. Project is created 2. Branches are indexed, but not built

Re: Enabling ImgBot in jenkinsci and in jenkins-infra/jenkins.io?

It's not about size in the repo but size being served. +1. On Mon, Oct 7, 2019 at 8:25 AM Baptiste Mathus wrote: > I'm a bit unconvinced this really changes the situation given things are > still versioned and kept in the repo history, but still +1 why not! :) > > Le lun. 7 oct. 2019 à 10:09,

Declarative Pipeline v1.4.0-beta-1 - Matrix stages

rowser = 'safari') [Pipeline] { (Branch: Matrix: os = 'windows', browser = 'ie') ... Declarative Pipeline 1.4.0-beta-1 is available from the experimental update center now ( https://jenkins.io/doc/developer/publishing/releasing-experimental-updates/). I look forward to hearing what you think

Re: Accessing PR head commit sha from a pipeline using branch source plugin

Yes, you should absolutely create a JIRA. On Tuesday, July 2, 2019 at 8:46:42 AM UTC-7, Julien HENRY wrote: > > Hi Jesse, > > Here are 3 PRs to implement the proposed change. I did only Bitbucket so > far, but if you confirm I'm on the good track, I will submit the same for > GitHub (I have

Re: Request for copy-editor permissions for github.com/jenkins-infra/jenkins.io

Absolutely +1. Surprised you don't already have it. On Thu, Jun 6, 2019 at 5:23 PM Rick wrote: > +1 from me > > On Fri, Jun 7, 2019 at 7:25 AM Alyssa Tong wrote: > >> +1 from me as well. Tracy's help will help to move the PRs along as we've >> experienced a little bit of a traffic jam :o) >>

Re: Seeking information about GitHub Branch Source Plugin

Parichay, I look forward to seeing what you come up with. -L. On Mon, May 20, 2019 at 5:29 AM Parichay Barpanda < parichay.barpa...@gmail.com> wrote: > Thanks Robert. > > I checked the Gitea Plugin. It seems like the most recently developed > plugin among other Branch Source Plugins like GitHub

Re: Multibranch pipeline overwrite GIT_COMMIT when merges the master branch

into how this scenario would be better addressed in the future. Liam Newman CloudBees Pipeline Team On Thursday, February 28, 2019 at 12:18:29 PM UTC-8, Ivan Fernandez Calvo wrote: > > Hi, > > We use multibranch pipelines for our project, it works pretty well and it > is n

Re: A new home for Jenkins

Hello everyone! We'll be doing an online Q on this tomorrow: January 23rd, 2019 - 10am PST (6pm UTC) Zoom: https://zoom.us/j/165732888 Here's a link to the Google calendar event

Re: Discussion: Community Onboarding/Outreach and Advocacy SIGs

t; wrote: > > I noticed that I have forgot to respond to Liam's question about the SIG > leadership. > > As a separate question: Who are potential owners of the SIG(s)? >> >> Some candidates: >> >> - Oleg Nenashev >>- Tracy Miranda

Re: Discussion: Community Onboarding/Outreach and Advocacy SIGs

Oleg, I totally agree with how you described the SIG's relationship with channels - there to help, not to specifically own/control the channels. As to naming: 1. "Advocacy and Outreach" 2. "Outreach and Advocacy" 3. "Advocacy and Community Outreach" 4. "Community Outreach and

Re: Using Jenkins JIRA to record development priorities for a plugin?

//github.com/jenkinsci/git-plugin/labels/5%20-%20Changelog> >> >> Thanks for the suggestion. We'll see how it works. >> >> Mark Waite >> >> On Sun, Dec 9, 2018 at 6:56 PM Mark Waite >> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> On Sun, Dec 9,

Re: Discussion: Community Onboarding/Outreach and Advocacy SIGs

"... related. I'd rather keep them together even with the scope being a bit broad." (don't know what happened there. CTRL-X misfire.) On Wednesday, December 5, 2018 at 10:55:41 AM UTC-8, Liam Newman wrote: > > Oleg, > I understand your point that Outreach and Advocacy

Re: Discussion: Community Onboarding/Outreach and Advocacy SIGs

s)? Some candidates: - Oleg Nenashev - Tracy Miranda - Liam Newman - (your name here - any voluteers?) Thanks, Liam N. On Monday, December 3, 2018 at 11:03:16 PM UTC-8, Oleg Nenashev wrote: > > My preference for structure would be as 1 SIG (called Outreach or Outr

Re: Discussion: Community Onboarding/Outreach and Advocacy SIGs

I'm also plus +1, Tracy. I'm a little concerned about over-broad scope. But was can always adjust it as we go along. On Monday, December 3, 2018 at 8:49:35 AM UTC-8, R Tyler Croy wrote: > > (replies inline) > > On Mon, 03 Dec 2018, Tracy Miranda wrote: > > > This sounds great. > > > > My

Re: Adding audit logs to Jenkins

Matt, Have you considered make a JEP for this effort? It seems like something that would benefit from having a design document that captures how the design was arrived at and what alternatives were considered. -Liam N. On Mon, Oct 15, 2018 at 2:28 PM Matt Sicker wrote: > I've started tasking

Re: Proposal: Pipeline Authoring SIG

mework > for Jenkins Pipeline (https://github.com/homeaway/jenkins-spock/) > * Liam Newman (from CloudBees) has written and edited quite a bit of > documentation for Jenkins Pipeline and provided feedback on the design on > a number of Pipeline feature. He expressed a desire to continue

Re: Proposal: Jenkins as an umbrella org for its upstream components

Oleg, I agree that having projects that jenkins depends deeply on sitting in personal repo's is not great. Offering or asking the owners of those projects the option to bring their project into the project umbrella makes sense. I see in your doc that part of the intent of having a separate

Re: JEP for Enhanced Travel Grant Proposal

JEP-12 has been set to draft I'd like to see this JEP describe the full travel program rather than the addendum. I've opened https://github.com/jenkinsci/jep/pull/206 to do this. If it is merged, I'll update the wiki page to point to the JEP. On Sunday, September 16, 2018 at 1:34:33 PM

Re: Request permission for plugins

I've made this JEP-216 Draft so that it can be referenced in discussions and form the prototype, but as noted it needs quite a bit of work. On Tuesday, August 28, 2018 at 7:01:57 AM UTC-7, Daniel Beck wrote: > > > > > On 28. Aug 2018, at 15:10, Oleg Nenashev > wrote: > > > > I can imagine a

Re: POTD: Jenkinsfile Runner

Oleg, +1 for cleanup, definitely. The path you propose overall sounds good to me. On Thursday, September 6, 2018 at 6:40:23 AM UTC-7, Oleg Nenashev wrote: > > Obviously, step (5) is a bad idea then. Could we just have 2 repos without > "fork" relations then? > If the codebase is not shared,

JEP Office hours 2018-09-06

=sharing Thanks, Liam Newman -- 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 jenkinsci-dev+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion

Re: JEP Office Hours 2018-08-16

P process improvements I would like to discuss with other >> contributors, but I didn't have time to write-up the proposals. So I have >> no topics for the today's meeting. >> >> BR, Oleg >> >> On Thursday, August 16, 2018 at 2:47:25 AM UTC+2, Liam Newman wrote: &g

JEP Office Hours 2018-08-16

: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1gWyaJ189n1fKkJS33xdK80PTY1jp11Tg3tWsQtFdyck/edit?usp=sharing Thanks, Liam Newman -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Jenkins Developers" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails fro

Re: Chinese Localization SIG

languages. I'm open to discussion. Thanks, Liam Newman On Saturday, August 11, 2018 at 8:10:45 AM UTC-7, Rick wrote: > > Hi all, > > > I made a list of plugins that will be foucsed in Localization SIG, like > below: > > > *credentials-plugin <https://github.com/j

Re: Deprecating ruby-runtime

I agree with Oleg. Let's do a JEP on this to plan and implement the deprecation, since it is a breaking change for anyone one using these plugins. -L. On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 6:50 AM Daniel Beck wrote: > > > On 16. May 2018, at 01:56, Owen B. Mehegan

Re: Suggestion: versioning the schema for Configuration as Code

Nicolas, Moving things to a separate JEP makes sense is some cases but it doesn't sound like the works here. The design choices that need to be made in relation to credentials CasC will effect the design of the JEP-201. Many plugins could be done in later JEPs, but for concepts as key as

Re: [JEP-201] [configuration-as-code] Feedback from Meetup

Just FYI: Nicolas asked a question of me in a GH comment: https://github.com/jenkinsci/jep/commit/78bede6c731e7a85a90ca374ca1c394e219aa961#commitcomment-28894501 @bitwiseman Discussion on plugin management > was probably introduced in this JEP too early as we

Re: [Jenkins X | JEP-400] Weekly on air hangout/office hours

d good to everyone? On Thursday, May 3, 2018 at 11:44:34 AM UTC-7, Liam Newman wrote: > > Okay, I'll set it up for the 17th. > > On Wednesday, May 2, 2018 at 12:40:32 AM UTC-7, James Rawlings wrote: >> >> >> On 2 May 2018, at 05:21, Michael Neale <mne...@cloudbees.com

Re: [Jenkins X | JEP-400] Weekly on air hangout/office hours

type things. There is also jenkins-infra which has 64, > which is separate (but I guess it is managed out of band). If it is a > matter of managing access to repos etc - could be solved I am sure. > > On Wednesday, May 2, 2018 at 1:26:58 PM UTC+10, Liam Newman wrote: >> >>

Re: [Jenkins X | JEP-400] Weekly on air hangout/office hours

Oleg: By "listing Jenkins X under sub-projects" do you also mean moving the repositories under jenkinsci org on github and using the Jenkins JIRA? I support that, but it something that should probably go on a separate thread. James, Michael, Obviously I dropped the ball on April 26th.

Using JEP process for future design changes to Declarative Pipeline?

luding Andrew) think of this idea? Thanks, Liam Newman Jenkins Evangelist -- 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 jenkinsci-dev+unsubscr...@

Re: Jenkins X status

If you're generating HTML, it seems like you'd be able to generate asciidoc pretty easily.That would be great. On Tuesday, May 1, 2018 at 12:20:29 AM UTC-7, Michael Neale wrote: > > Is there a way to x-post that to a jenkins.io blog? (even as a > PR/somewhat automatically?) > > On

Re: [JEP-201] [configuration-as-code] Feedback from Meetup

(offlist) I want to be clear: I was not singling you out or criticizing. This looks like a challenging thread, and you're doing a great job staying positive and open to ideas. If there's anything I can do to help just say so. Thanks for all your hard work, Liam Newman On Sun, Apr 22, 2018 at 11

Re: External Artifact Storage

Re: Accepted status: I have a PR 76 pending merge that (among other things) clarifies the meaning of "Accepted" status. One of the key points is that review and acceptance should not be taken lightly. By marking a JEP as "Accepted" the Reviewer

Re: [JEP-201] [configuration-as-code] Feedback from Meetup

Ewelina, Nicolas, I'm jumping in because I don't see anyone mentioning who will be doing this. As JEP-1 sponsor, I would like to remind you that part of your duties as sponsors of JEP-201 include different viewpoints and design suggestions in your JEP. (I'm jumping in because I don't see

Re: [Jenkins X | JEP-400] Weekly on air hangout/office hours

That is totally doable. What day of the week what time (including timezone)? On Tuesday, April 17, 2018 at 4:49:12 PM UTC-7, Michael Neale wrote: > > Hey all - James Rawlings has proposed a weekly on air/office hours. I know > there is a jenkinscicd youtube channel capable of doing scheduled

Re: [Essentials] Instance Health Checking JEP: ready for first review

Jesse, Thanks for the reminder about that point around commenting. As an editor, I have no objections to having pre-draft discussions in whatever way contributors see fit. As a sponsor of JEP-1, it is important to me that when a sponsor submits a JEP for "Approval as Draft", that feedback they

Re: JEP: Modification of "Accepted" JEPs

On Monday, March 26, 2018 at 1:25:34 PM UTC-7, Liam Newman wrote: > > Andrew, > > That's an interesting point as well. The process is still relatively new, > so it's not surprising that there's a learning curve and a need for more > examples. JEPs with tighter focus will defin

Re: L10n of JS files

Ullrich, Could you give a little more context as to what you're asking about? Liam Newman On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 1:05 AM Ullrich Hafner <ullrich.haf...@gmail.com> wrote: > Is it possible to localize JS files? Or do I need to place localized > labels for some JS charts on i

Re: JEP: Modification of "Accepted" JEPs

to stagnation. We’re > far better off with more JEPs of potentially smaller size/scope, > potentially amending earlier JEPs, than a small number of bloated ones, IMO. > > A. > > On Sat, Mar 24, 2018 at 9:34 AM Liam Newman <bitwise...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>

Re: JEP: Modification of "Accepted" JEPs

This is a ton of great feedback, thanks! Ewelina, JEPs have a number of purposes, but they are definitely _not_ meant to stifle innovation. At minimum though, they are meant to provide a medium for building consensus on the design and implementation of major features/processes of the Jenkins

JEP: Modification of "Accepted" JEPs

iew in light of 1 and 2.) In the case of the above PR. it means that Ewelina would need to start a thread on the mailing list to discuss this change and give people time to review before we merge that change. What do people think of this? An feedback or suggestions? Thanks, Liam Newman JEP-1 Sponsor

Re: [Essentials] Collecting usage telemetry from Jenkins Pipeline

I think it would be interesting to record some metrics around the complexity of Pipelines, such as cyclomatic complexity and number of lines in the Jenkinsfile. If shared libraries are used record the complexity and size of those. Also the size of the strings passed to external scripting steps

Re: first draft of a new JEP: Jenkins X: Jenkins for Kubernetes CD

Thanks, James! This has been approved as Draft. Going forward the current version can be viewed here: https://github.com/jenkinsci/jep/blob/master/jep/400/README.adoc Please continue to discuss in this droup and submit pull requests as needed. Thanks, Liam Newman JEP Editor On Friday

Re: Temporary ownership request for Project Description Setter Plugin

There are less than 2K installs of this plugin per month. Perhaps a more reasonable choice would be to End-of-life this plugin? -L. On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 3:04 PM Daniel Beck wrote: > > > On 12. Jan 2018, at 22:51, Oleg Nenashev wrote: > > > > I

Re: Plugin idea - declarative pipeline script builder

Sharon, >From context, it sounds like you're using the Job DSL to create Pipeline jobs. Is that correct? Could you share an example of what your code would have to look like without your tool? Thanks, -Liam Newman On Wed, Jan 3, 2018 at 2:09 PM Jesse Glick <jgl...@cloudbees.com&

Re: The Jenkins Enhancement Process (JEP) is ready for review

JEP-1 has been accepted and is now active. Thanks everyone! On Tuesday, November 7, 2017 at 9:06:03 AM UTC-8, Jesse Glick wrote: > > On Fri, Nov 3, 2017 at 6:23 PM, Liam Newman <bitwi...@gmail.com > > wrote: > > there are still some discussions occurring around so

The Jenkins Enhancement Process (JEP) is ready for review

for it to be reviewed for Acceptance. You can review the current state of the proposal in preparation for the meeting: https://github.com/jenkinsci/jep/pull/12 . Discussion so far: https://groups.google.com/d/topic/jenkinsci-dev/spDAr8EJm3c/discussion Thanks, -Liam Newman -- You received this message

Re: Request for feedback: Jenkins Enhancement Proposal (JEP)

Jesse has pointed out that the process does not say when or how JEPs are merged to master. There is discussion/proposals needed around what this should look like: https://github.com/jenkinsci/jep/pull/25 On Tuesday, October 31, 2017 at 10:45:54 AM UTC-7, Liam Newman wrote: > > Pr

Re: Draft JEP: Switch Remoting/XStream blacklist to a whitelist

This submission has been approved as Draft JEP-200. https://github.com/jenkinsci/jep/tree/jep-200 On Monday, October 30, 2017 at 3:10:25 PM UTC-7, Jesse Glick wrote: > > After some discussion within the CERT team, I am happy to propose > >

Re: Request for feedback: Jenkins Enhancement Proposal (JEP)

Proposed change to Add an option JIRA header has been merged. On Monday, October 30, 2017 at 11:28:29 AM UTC-7, Liam Newman wrote: > > FYI > Jesse has proposed the adding an optional JIRA header. > https://github.com/jenkinsci/jep/pull/21 > > It seems reasonable to me. Unle

Re: Request for feedback: Jenkins Enhancement Proposal (JEP)

FYI Jesse has proposed the adding an optional JIRA header. https://github.com/jenkinsci/jep/pull/21 It seems reasonable to me. Unless there is strong opposition I'll merge this the main proposal on Wednesday. Thanks, Liam Newman On Friday, October 27, 2017 at 4:33:15 PM UTC-7, Kohsuke

Re: Request for feedback: Jenkins Enhancement Proposal (JEP)

JEP-1 is on the agenda for the next governance meeting. Please review the PR and any propose fixes/changes now. On Tuesday, October 24, 2017 at 7:08:47 PM UTC-7, Liam Newman wrote: > > There's been quiet a bit of discussion offline about this > I've closed #18 as Kohsuke's objections t

Re: Request for feedback: Jenkins Enhancement Proposal (JEP)

lly rooting the chain > of authority to BDFL (like how Queen and Emperor symbolically empowers the > elected government.) The removal of BDFL + Delegate tries to root the chain > of authority to "consensus of core contributors", but that fails to achieve > this goal becau

Re: Request for feedback: Jenkins Enhancement Proposal (JEP)

bandwidth to make further changes this week. Oleg had some valid questions, and said he'd try to submit a PR addressing them. If anyone else wants to pick up a little of the load here, that'd be great - comments welcome, PRs preferred. Thanks, Liam Newman On Tuesday, September 19, 2017 at 10:12

Re: Request for feedback: Jenkins Enhancement Proposal (JEP)

I think this is great idea. I agree with the proposed process. I think the proposal document itself could use some tweaks, which I've suggested in PR (oops oh well). On Wednesday, September 13, 2017 at 12:33:04 PM UTC-7, R Tyler Croy wrote: > > At the Jenkins World Contributor Summit a

Re: State of Xcode plugin??

There is a process for these situation, but when did you contact them? Maintainers are often busy, Have you created issues and/or submitted pull requests to fix existing issues? On Tuesday, September 6, 2016 at 10:37:33 AM UTC-7, Brantone wrote: > > Curious as to the current state of Xcode

Re: Plugin Tests Memory Usage (Maybe jenkins rule)

with lower memory requirements. https://ci.jenkins.io/job/Plugins/job/git-plugin/job/3.0.0-beta/ On Wednesday, July 27, 2016 at 3:02:46 PM UTC-7, Liam Newman wrote: > > So, we're getting inconsistent behavior, but definitely still seeing out > of memory errors. Correct? > > > O

Re: Plugin Tests Memory Usage (Maybe jenkins rule)

Sandell <rsan...@cloudbees.com >> > wrote: >> > I had to tweak my pom settings when I switched to the new parent pom >> because the slaves that the standard plugin builds run on are 2 cores with >> 2 GB RAM and my original settings were too big for that when running in >> par

PR needs review: job-dsl-plugin #880

Fixes snippet generator compatibility in jobDSL step. https://github.com/jenkinsci/job-dsl-plugin/pull/880 It's been close to 2 weeks since I opened this. Any feedback appreciated. Thanks! Liam Newman -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Je

Re: How to enable Travis CI for jenkins plugin repo

Andrey, What does running in TravisCI provide that is not already in the jenkinsci.org build? Just wondering. Thanks! Liam Newman -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Jenkins Developers" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiv