Re: Backporting for LTS 2.121.1 started

2018-05-24 Thread ivilacides 
Hi Oliver,

Any news on publishing the 2.121.1 in http://mirrors.jenkins.io/war-stable/?

Thanks in advance

On Monday, May 21, 2018 at 2:44:31 PM UTC+2, ogondza wrote:
>
> On 2018-05-21 14:26, Daniel Beck wrote: 
>
> > The current packaging (or at least the bits that don't declare a Java 
> dependency) has been used in weekly releases for a long time successfully, 
> and probably for the 2.89.x line and older as well. We document the 
> intended behavior on the repo index page (see PR discussion). It's just an 
> oversight that resulted in the outdated packaging being used for 2.107.1 
> and 2.107.2. 
>
> Hmm, I was under impression 1.107.3 was the first LTS with given 
> packaging change but you are right, it was in 2.73 and 2.89 as well. 
>
> > IMO we could mention this in the upgrade guide, complete with 
> explanation similar to the package repo index pages, and done. No reason to 
> diverge LTS packaging from weekly packaging deliberately. 
>
> If we do not intend to "fix" that (and I am not saying we should), then 
> yes. 
>
> -- 
> oliver 
>

-- 
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 on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/f2d537d4-3421-4773-bba9-db8438ae1146%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Backporting for LTS 2.121.1 started

2018-05-21 Thread Oliver Gondža 

On 2018-05-21 14:26, Daniel Beck wrote:


The current packaging (or at least the bits that don't declare a Java 
dependency) has been used in weekly releases for a long time successfully, and 
probably for the 2.89.x line and older as well. We document the intended 
behavior on the repo index page (see PR discussion). It's just an oversight 
that resulted in the outdated packaging being used for 2.107.1 and 2.107.2.


Hmm, I was under impression 1.107.3 was the first LTS with given 
packaging change but you are right, it was in 2.73 and 2.89 as well.



IMO we could mention this in the upgrade guide, complete with explanation 
similar to the package repo index pages, and done. No reason to diverge LTS 
packaging from weekly packaging deliberately.


If we do not intend to "fix" that (and I am not saying we should), then yes.

--
oliver

--
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 on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/be120f20-53ad-4682-4fda-62b3d5ffa322%40gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Backporting for LTS 2.121.1 started

2018-05-21 Thread Daniel Beck 

> On 21. May 2018, at 10:06, ogondza  wrote:
> 
> The backporting window is closing this Wednesday. There ware no candidates 
> nominated (likely due to recent baseline choice) BUT there is the outstanding 
> problem of JENKINS-51253[0].
> 
> There does not seem to be a consensus on whether/how to fix it[1] so I am 
> wondering which version of remoting we prefer to use for 2.121 LTS. I lean 
> towards using pre-JENKINS-45287[2] remoting - before the regression was 
> introduced. But there are alternatives of shipping current master or 
> expediting the fix.
> 
> Thoughts?
> 
> [0] https://issues.jenkins-ci.org/browse/JENKINS-51253
> [1] https://github.com/jenkinsci/packaging/pull/107
> [2] https://issues.jenkins-ci.org/browse/JENKINS-45287

I assume s/remoting/packaging/g here, otherwise I'm really confused.

The current packaging (or at least the bits that don't declare a Java 
dependency) has been used in weekly releases for a long time successfully, and 
probably for the 2.89.x line and older as well. We document the intended 
behavior on the repo index page (see PR discussion). It's just an oversight 
that resulted in the outdated packaging being used for 2.107.1 and 2.107.2.

IMO we could mention this in the upgrade guide, complete with explanation 
similar to the package repo index pages, and done. No reason to diverge LTS 
packaging from weekly packaging deliberately.

-- 
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 on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/891E05A0-1BEA-469E-BC14-6C66955EDE53%40beckweb.net.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Backporting for LTS 2.121.1 started

2018-05-21 Thread ogondza 
The backporting window is closing this Wednesday. There ware no candidates 
nominated (likely due to recent baseline choice) BUT there is the 
outstanding problem of JENKINS-51253[0].

There does not seem to be a consensus on whether/how to fix it[1] so I am 
wondering which version of remoting we prefer to use for 2.121 LTS. I lean 
towards using pre-JENKINS-45287[2] remoting - before the regression was 
introduced. But there are alternatives of shipping current master or 
expediting the fix.

Thoughts?

[0] https://issues.jenkins-ci.org/browse/JENKINS-51253
[1] https://github.com/jenkinsci/packaging/pull/107
[2] https://issues.jenkins-ci.org/browse/JENKINS-45287

-- 
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 on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/6ba611bf-61ca-4f37-b346-06b5322daa3a%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Backporting for LTS 2.121.1 started

2018-05-10 Thread Oliver Gondža 

Backporting has started and the RC is scheduled for 2018-05-23.

Candidates: https://issues.jenkins-ci.org/issues/?filter=12146
Fixed: 
https://issues.jenkins-ci.org/issues/?jql=labels%20%3D%202.121.1-fixed
Rejected: 
https://issues.jenkins-ci.org/issues/?jql=labels%20%3D%202.121.1-rejected

--
oliver

--
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 on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/cdfe938c-0c14-c9fa-5cc4-a0c210f514dd%40gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.