Backporting for 1.651.2 has started

[ogondza]

Hi, 

Backporting for next LTS release is on. The RC will be published 2016-04-27. 

Candidates: https://issues.jenkins-ci.org/issues/?filter=12146 
Fixed: 
https://issues.jenkins-ci.org/issues/?jql=labels%20%3D%201.651.2-fixed 
-- 
oliver 

[ogondza]

Consider https://github.com/jenkinsci/jenkins/pull/2283 once merged.

--

oliver

[Stephen Connolly]

JENKINS-34213 needs to be on that list. As that requires a remoting release, and it would be nice to actually have a remoting release with the TLS certificate fixes that I contributed that were accidentally yanked with the revert of the JNLPProtocol3 stuff, what do we want to do w.r.t. the remoting jar for this?

--
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-de...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/9f632903-254a-4837-847d-a59aab817b31%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Arnaud Héritier]

+1000 for JENKINS-34213 + TLS certificate fixes

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/CA%2BnPnMzWJbvmTabTDzcSA0esPZFV4g4FkBdC1kiSSHKaDaR18A%40mail.gmail.com.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

-----

Arnaud Héritier

http://aheritier.net

Mail/GTalk: aheritier AT gmail DOT com

Twitter/Skype : aheritier

[Daniel Beck]

> On 25.04.2016, at 12:22, Arnaud Héritier <aher...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> +1000 for JENKINS-34213 + TLS certificate fixes

Has anything changed since the March 30 project meeting, in which we determined that JENKINS-33886[1] is serious enough to not include newer remoting versions? I see no notable progress in that issue.

1: https://issues.jenkins-ci.org/browse/JENKINS-33886

[Arnaud Héritier]

I think no. JNLP3 shouldn't land and we should try to propose others fixes without it.

--
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-de...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/D7258BF4-E15B-4EB1-857B-DBF31BA4C09A%40beckweb.net.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Daniel Beck]

> On 25.04.2016, at 13:11, Arnaud Héritier <aher...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I think no. JNLP3 shouldn't land and we should try to propose others fixes without it.

I proposed a 'stable' release of remoting in that project meeting, an idea that wasn't embraced enthusiastically.

Maybe now that there's more to fix in remoting than just JENKINS-28289?

[ogondza]

I have backported the nobrainers but the remoting related stuff deserves another look tomorow.

--
oliver

[Stephen Connolly]

I am not proposing to land JNLPProtocol3, but there were other changes in the remoting version that backing out removed. specifically JENKINS-32980, https://github.com/jenkinsci/remoting/commit/57140914682f0f5436f89c60b617c02313ad39d0 https://github.com/jenkinsci/remoting/commit/72db5d990370b5e3c39eadd937ff07d347002659 https://github.com/jenkinsci/remoting/commit/c2f49ee65a284a8bb0219a8f6eaa45dae9f1ea2a as well as https://github.com/jenkinsci/remoting/commit/f4d287652e09da627f51779bec1c3ca7f1d46e70 and while https://github.com/jenkinsci/remoting/commit/30dc0dd340ca7deb3e6aace97e8c9c22206182ca is only a nice to have, it's low risk so should be included too.

--
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-de...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/D7258BF4-E15B-4EB1-857B-DBF31BA4C09A%40beckweb.net.

[Stephen Connolly]

There was more to fix and if I'd been able to attend the meeting or been advised up front of the agenda (what happened to the idea of sending a reminder mail to the list dev 24h before the meeting) I would have argued strongly in favour of a stable remoting.

In any case I will be landing JNLPProtocol4 in the near future which has the advantage of being NIO based and offers full TLS encryption of the connection rather than a home-grown encryption protocol

--
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-de...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/65BD502C-3E8A-4A51-943E-259A234CCC7F%40beckweb.net.

[Arnaud Héritier]

I missed the project meeting but based on all feedbacks I'm also in favor to create a stable branch based on 2.55 with all possible fixes included.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/CA%2BnPnMw_4DCGdYFO_W2W7HvjBdZWP2JNG3F7fGtELaPTFTcMwQ%40mail.gmail.com.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[ogondza]

I have backported remoting 2.57 to fix JENKINS-28289, JENKINS-33999 and JENKINS-32980. In case it incorporates another problems I have miss, let me now here or on the meeting.

--
oliver

[Stephen Connolly]

I think we need a 2.58 release from KK to include the memory leak fix

--

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-de...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/651e8e25-2698-4763-84ae-ba23cf3c3e4c%40googlegroups.com.

[Oleg Nenashev]

I'll ping him again about it

[Oliver Gondža]

I doubt this is .2 material. Stephen, are you ok with .3?

On 04/28/2016 10:09 AM, Oleg Nenashev wrote:
> I'll ping him again about it
>
> On Apr 28, 2016 10:07, "Stephen Connolly"
> <stephen.al...@gmail.com

> <mailto:stephen.al...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> I think we need a 2.58 release from KK to include the memory leak fix

--
oliver

[Stephen Connolly]

The fix is a rather serious memory leak for anyone with long running active slaves. I would argue that it is low risk to include it on the basis of the testing I performed on this code and an analysis of the actual change. 

If it misses the boat, fair enough, but we should try and get it on the boat IMHO

--
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-de...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/e3be7523-8ccd-2b4a-8906-e582688c93a3%40gmail.com.