(replies inline)
On Mon, 11 Sep 2017, Jesse Glick wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 10, 2017 at 6:38 PM, ikedam <
iked...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > There's a pull request to have Copyartifact support pipeline symbol
> > expressions [6].
> > I believe it's reasonable to merge, but, on the other hand, I'm afraid it
> > would result the compatibility issue more serious.
>
> Perhaps it would be best to leave CopyArtifact as it is, useful for
> freestyle projects, and introduce a separate much simpler plugin for
> use from Pipeline???or even a single step for `workflow-basic-steps`.
> Like `unarchive` (perhaps even an option to it), but accepting a job
> name and build number as simple parameters. No need for ???run
> selectors??? since a properly written job chain will have the upstream
> pass the build number downstream as a parameter, though you could
> accept a permalink like `lastStable` in lieu of a number. All of the
> complexity around build selectors, filters, copy methods, etc. is
> really not needed for Pipeline.
Your suggestion made me chuckle because I conned Kohsuke into adding Pipeline
support to Copy Artifact after breaking the news to him that 'unarchive'
doesn't do what he thought it did.
I would encourage adoption of the Copy Artifact plugin and incorporation of
Pipeline support into that rather than building another plugin. There are 34k
installs of the plugin which would potentially benefit from switching.
Cheers
- R. Tyler Croy
------------------------------------------------------
Code: <
https://github.com/rtyler>
Chatter: <
https://twitter.com/agentdero>
xmpp:
rty...@jabber.org
% gpg --keyserver
keys.gnupg.net --recv-key 1426C7DC3F51E16F
------------------------------------------------------