Re: Any plans for the github checks API?

I was interested in preparing a draft proposal as a student for this project and wanted to develop a POC using a simple plugin/extension that would go through the reports published by the warnings plugin and get a status published on the ChecksAPI. +jxpe...@godaddy.com Do you already have a

Re: Any plans for the github checks API?

https://github.com/jenkins-infra/jenkins.io/pull/2822/ > Am 03.02.2020 um 05:14 schrieb Marky Jackson : > > I would say this needs a new channel > > >> On Feb 2, 2020, at 8:06 PM, Sladyn Nunes wrote: >> >>  >> Hello, >> One small

Re: Any plans for the github checks API?

I would say this needs a new channel > On Feb 2, 2020, at 8:06 PM, Sladyn Nunes wrote: > >  > Hello, > One small addition remaining is the point of contact for potential students, > are we going to have a new gitter channel or reuse the existing github branch > source or warnings plugin

Re: Any plans for the github checks API?

Hello, One small addition remaining is the point of contact for potential students, are we going to have a new gitter channel or reuse the existing github branch source or warnings plugin channel. On Sun, Feb 2, 2020, 7:15 PM Oleg Nenashev wrote: > We can publish as is for draft, but maybe it

Re: Any plans for the github checks API?

We can publish as is for draft, but maybe it makes sense to convert to asciidoc right away On Sun, Feb 2, 2020, 14:36 Ullrich Hafner wrote: > Ok, that means I should convert everything into asciidoc or do we just > link to the existing document? > > Am 01.02.2020 um 23:59 schrieb Oleg Nenashev

Re: Any plans for the github checks API?

Ok, that means I should convert everything into asciidoc or do we just link to the existing document? > Am 01.02.2020 um 23:59 schrieb Oleg Nenashev : > > I added few comments, but I believe that the project idea is ready to be > published as a draft or as a final one. > Thanks Ulli! > > On

Re: Any plans for the github checks API?

I added few comments, but I believe that the project idea is ready to be published as a draft or as a final one. Thanks Ulli! On Friday, January 31, 2020 at 6:00:54 PM UTC+1, Ullrich Hafner wrote: > > Ah, I already added you ;-) > > >

Re: Any plans for the github checks API?

Ah, I already added you ;-) https://docs.google.com/document/d/1fl3sF0mArtv2THOjPSZvNufGme4P24BtT0BirHMeMRY/ Feel free to run away... > Am 31.01.2020 um 17:32 schrieb Jon Brohauge : > > Leave it to Oleg to

Re: Any plans for the github checks API?

Leave it to Oleg to save my a** ;-) On Thursday, January 30, 2020 at 5:16:45 PM UTC+1, Oleg Nenashev wrote: > > I would join as mentor as well > > On Thu, Jan 30, 2020, 17:05 Jon Brohauge > > wrote: > >> This is something I'd love to see get accepted into GSoC 2020. I'd even >> volunteer being

Re: Any plans for the github checks API?

I would join as mentor as well On Thu, Jan 30, 2020, 17:05 Jon Brohauge wrote: > This is something I'd love to see get accepted into GSoC 2020. I'd even > volunteer being a mentor for this. Although a more technical mentor would > probably be needed alongside. > > Rgds, > Jon > > On Wednesday,

Re: Any plans for the github checks API?

This is something I'd love to see get accepted into GSoC 2020. I'd even volunteer being a mentor for this. Although a more technical mentor would probably be needed alongside. Rgds, Jon On Wednesday, January 29, 2020 at 11:23:31 AM UTC+1, Ullrich Hafner wrote: > > I started a document for the

Re: Any plans for the github checks API?

Ah, yes, it should be fixed now... > Am 29.01.2020 um 11:31 schrieb Oleg Nenashev : > > Great, thanks! Could you please grant "Comment" permission to viewers? > > On Wed, Jan 29, 2020, 11:23 Ullrich Hafner > wrote: > I started a document for the project idea: >

Re: Any plans for the github checks API?

Great, thanks! Could you please grant "Comment" permission to viewers? On Wed, Jan 29, 2020, 11:23 Ullrich Hafner wrote: > I started a document for the project idea: > > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1fl3sF0mArtv2THOjPSZvNufGme4P24BtT0BirHMeMRY/edit?usp=sharing > > Feel free to extend or

Re: Any plans for the github checks API?

I started a document for the project idea: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1fl3sF0mArtv2THOjPSZvNufGme4P24BtT0BirHMeMRY/edit?usp=sharing Feel free to extend or comment. > Am 28.01.2020 um

Re: Any plans for the github checks API?

+ Ullrich Hafner who was interested to write up a project idea for this topic. I would be happy to be a mentor there, and I believe we could find more mentors to make it happen On Mon, Jan 27, 2020 at 5:55 PM Sladyn Nunes wrote: > +1 > "ChatOps" triggers would be highly beneficial thereby

Re: Any plans for the github checks API?

+1 "ChatOps" triggers would be highly beneficial thereby letting the github-branch-source to run the required checks on specific parts. Also detailed reports from GitHub Checks could be published and maybe parsed as required. On Mon, Jan 27, 2020, 6:27 PM Oleg Nenashev wrote: > Just to bump

Re: Any plans for the github checks API?

+1 would be great, I've done some ground laying work for it here: https://github.com/jenkinsci/github-branch-source-plugin/pull/269 It requires a github-api-plugin version to be published with a recent ish version of github-api Thanks Tim On Mon, 27 Jan 2020 at 16:09, Raihaan Shouhell wrote:

Re: Any plans for the github checks API?

I think having a checks api would be great. Reports sending checks back to the change request would be a useful feature. On Monday, 27 January 2020 20:57:31 UTC+8, Oleg Nenashev wrote: > > Just to bump this thread, we consider adding Checks API integration as a > GSoC 2020 project idea. > We

Re: Any plans for the github checks API?

Just to bump this thread, we consider adding Checks API integration as a GSoC 2020 project idea. We had a preliminary discussion with Ulli Hafner (Warnings NG) and other parties. If someone is interested to join the project, please let me know On Thursday, May 10, 2018 at 5:56:28 PM UTC+2,

Re: Any plans for the github checks API?

On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 5:37 AM, Steven F wrote: > The examples in the article show elements such as linting, > build, static analysis as separate and individually runnable things. In > Jenkins 2.x Pipeline it feels like bundling these things together is more >

Re: Any plans for the github checks API?

I'm not sure how the part about rerunning individual stages would work, but I could see rerunning the entire job from your github PR page. We sometimes have jobs where there are tests which fail occasionally, or 3rd party services are flakey, and in those cases just rerunning the job from

Re: Any plans for the github checks API?

The checks API looks great, but it seems like there is a disconnect between the all-in-one Pipeline of Jenkins and what the checks API expects to be working with. The examples in the article show elements such as linting, build, static analysis as separate and individually runnable things. In

Re: Any plans for the github checks API?

The `github-branch-source` plugin uses the older Status API. There might be some opportunities to improve the UX with the Checks API, I am not sure. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Jenkins Developers" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop

Any plans for the github checks API?

Someone on my team posted something about the new github checks API , which is like a better status API, providing detailed error info, etc. Is anyone aware of if any plans to do anything with it in Jenkins? I wrote a plugin that