Backporting for 2.7.1 has started

114 views
Skip to first unread message

Oliver Gondža

unread,
Jun 8, 2016, 2:49:41 PM6/8/16
to jenkin...@googlegroups.com
Hi,

Next LTS release line was selected. The backporting has started and the
RC will be published 2016-06-22.

Candidates: https://issues.jenkins-ci.org/issues/?filter=12146
Fixed:
https://issues.jenkins-ci.org/issues/?jql=labels%20%3D%202.7.1-fixed
--
oliver

ogondza

unread,
Jun 8, 2016, 2:52:03 PM6/8/16
to Jenkins Developers
stephenconnolly on JENKINS-35402: [~olivergondza] I really would like this in the 2.7.1 LTS
 

Arnaud Héritier

unread,
Jun 8, 2016, 3:23:08 PM6/8/16
to jenkin...@googlegroups.com
Jenkins-35178 please. 
34881 seems also good to have for a good upgrade experience ??


Le mercredi 8 juin 2016, ogondza <ogo...@gmail.com> a écrit :
stephenconnolly on JENKINS-35402: [~olivergondza] I really would like this in the 2.7.1 LTS
 

--
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/4b27217d-6487-4091-b46b-d869f4326d69%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


--
-----
Arnaud Héritier
Mail/GTalk: aheritier AT gmail DOT com
Twitter/Skype : aheritier

Robert Sandell

unread,
Jun 9, 2016, 6:05:57 AM6/9/16
to jenkin...@googlegroups.com
Exciting! :D


--
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.

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



--
Robert Sandell
Software Engineer
CloudBees Inc.

Oleg Nenashev

unread,
Jun 9, 2016, 8:57:30 AM6/9/16
to Jenkins Developers
Hi,

Uh, 2.8 got 3 bad community ratings without any explanation. Nothing in the bugtracker as well :(

I think we should backport all 2.8 fixes, because they will be compliant with 2-week soaking interval by the release. The following 2.8 fixes are really important IMHO:
  • JENKINS-35206 - must have, regression fix
  • JENKINS-34881 - almost must have, because it causes really bad UX for instances with preconfigured security (containers, Boot Hook scripts)
  • PR-2386 - Bump of the Windows slave installer, fix slave installation flow for modern Windows OS versions
  • JENKINS-35178 - UX issue on config pages in Safari

I would also consider PR 2379, because it slightly improves Jenkins WebUI performance. JENKINS-31915 seems to be important as well, but there is not so much votes for this fix.


Regarding non-released changes, maybe we want to consider the following:


BR, Oleg










четверг, 9 июня 2016 г., 12:05:57 UTC+2 пользователь Robert Sandell написал:

nicolas de loof

unread,
Jun 9, 2016, 12:07:39 PM6/9/16
to jenkin...@googlegroups.com
Any chance for https://github.com/jenkinsci/jenkins/commit/310c952602f7241cb74454b7e7fb2be0bf3d2980 to be backported ? 

not even released yet, so I would be fine if you answer "no way", but this is a minor code change (new event on RunListener) and will let me release one-shot-executor which could help a lot in docker and other container-related plugins.

Oleg Nenashev

unread,
Jun 9, 2016, 12:43:59 PM6/9/16
to JenkinsCI Developers
@Nicolas
This an improvement, which changes the API.
In order to make it backportable, you should ensure that there is no external API users and add @Restricted then.
If it works, I think backporiting into .2 may be justified.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "Jenkins Developers" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/jenkinsci-dev/ieXnaHVqX3k/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to jenkinsci-de...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/CANMVJznF8P4UU7JE9xT_HzCdj2pi7cx%2B%3D%2Bqr8M_UXSSe82YT9w%40mail.gmail.com.

nicolas de loof

unread,
Jun 9, 2016, 4:37:32 PM6/9/16
to jenkin...@googlegroups.com
2016-06-09 18:43 GMT+02:00 Oleg Nenashev <o.v.ne...@gmail.com>:
@Nicolas
Any chance for https://github.com/jenkinsci/jenkins/commit/310c952602f7241cb74454b7e7fb2be0bf3d2980 to be backported ? https://issues.jenkins-ci.org/browse/JENKINS-34923

This an improvement, which changes the API.
In order to make it backportable, you should ensure that there is no external API users and add @Restricted then.

not sure I get it, what do you mean by "no external API users" ? API was changed extended so it can be used from one-shot-executor plugin. Not sure how @Restricted works, but seems this would block this usage, right ?
Then will need to wait for a future LTS.
 

Daniel Beck

unread,
Jun 9, 2016, 6:05:31 PM6/9/16
to jenkin...@googlegroups.com

> On 09.06.2016, at 14:57, Oleg Nenashev <o.v.ne...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I would also consider PR 2379, because it slightly improves Jenkins WebUI performance.

Could we please remember what constitutes a change eligible for back porting?

Because this isn't. I like the change as well, but it's a tiny performance improvement.
Similar problem. It's an improvement/feature.


We're already drowning Oliver in legitimate requests, wanting features in LTS is overkill ;-)

Stephen Connolly

unread,
Jun 9, 2016, 6:20:39 PM6/9/16
to jenkin...@googlegroups.com
JENKINS-35402 is the only one that I am asking for. I know technically it is a feature but it is a simple refactoring and I believe it will be needed for some use cases with regard to people that are repackaging Jenkins... there are other ways around if we cannot get this in, but those other ways are considerably more ugly and require adding a lot more code to a repackaged Jenkins WAR than would be required with this small change

--
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.

Oleg Nenashev

unread,
Jun 10, 2016, 6:25:48 AM6/10/16
to Jenkins Developers
JENKINS-35402 is the only one that I am asking for. I know technically it is a feature but it is a simple refactoring and I believe it will be needed for some use cases with regard to people that are repackaging Jenkins... there are other ways around if we cannot get this in, but those other ways are considerably more ugly and require adding a lot more code to a repackaged Jenkins WAR than would be required with this small change

I agree that this change would be useful && it's harmless.
So it may be fine to merge it into .1 or maybe .2
 
пятница, 10 июня 2016 г., 0:20:39 UTC+2 пользователь Stephen Connolly написал:

Stephen Connolly

unread,
Jun 10, 2016, 6:27:33 AM6/10/16
to jenkin...@googlegroups.com
On 10 June 2016 at 11:25, Oleg Nenashev <o.v.ne...@gmail.com> wrote:
JENKINS-35402 is the only one that I am asking for. I know technically it is a feature but it is a simple refactoring and I believe it will be needed for some use cases with regard to people that are repackaging Jenkins... there are other ways around if we cannot get this in, but those other ways are considerably more ugly and require adding a lot more code to a repackaged Jenkins WAR than would be required with this small change

I agree that this change would be useful && it's harmless.
So it may be fine to merge it into .1 or maybe .2

Either it goes into .1 or it doesn't go in IMHO
 
 
пятница, 10 июня 2016 г., 0:20:39 UTC+2 пользователь Stephen Connolly написал:
JENKINS-35402 is the only one that I am asking for. I know technically it is a feature but it is a simple refactoring and I believe it will be needed for some use cases with regard to people that are repackaging Jenkins... there are other ways around if we cannot get this in, but those other ways are considerably more ugly and require adding a lot more code to a repackaged Jenkins WAR than would be required with this small change

On 9 June 2016 at 23:05, Daniel Beck <m...@beckweb.net> wrote:

> On 09.06.2016, at 14:57, Oleg Nenashev <o.v.ne...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I would also consider PR 2379, because it slightly improves Jenkins WebUI performance.

Could we please remember what constitutes a change eligible for back porting?

Because this isn't. I like the change as well, but it's a tiny performance improvement.


> On 09.06.2016, at 18:07, nicolas de loof <nicolas...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Any chance for https://github.com/jenkinsci/jenkins/commit/310c952602f7241cb74454b7e7fb2be0bf3d2980 to be backported ?
> https://issues.jenkins-ci.org/browse/JENKINS-34923

Similar problem. It's an improvement/feature.


We're already drowning Oliver in legitimate requests, wanting features in LTS is overkill ;-)

--
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/42EC5EF4-DAFA-4F20-8DBA-00A7B23D9BB5%40beckweb.net.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
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.

Oliver Gondža

unread,
Jun 10, 2016, 7:33:54 AM6/10/16
to jenkin...@googlegroups.com
Uh, I should better get started it seems. There is something in sending
this mail late or forgetting it entirely.

--
oliver

Oleg Nenashev

unread,
Jun 10, 2016, 7:01:43 PM6/10/16
to JenkinsCI Developers, Jenkins INFRA group, R Tyler Croy
CCed Infra Team.
I suppose we're also interested to get https://issues.jenkins-ci.org/browse/JENKINS-35641 backported into 2.7.1.



--
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "Jenkins Developers" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/jenkinsci-dev/ieXnaHVqX3k/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to jenkinsci-de...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/aded04c1-28e3-5359-5bb9-6eaa647c7b0a%40gmail.com.

Baptiste Mathus

unread,
Jun 11, 2016, 9:36:15 AM6/11/16
to Jenkins Developers
+1 for JENKINS-35641 if Oliver agrees. 

It would make sense IMO as the 2.x has OOTB security as one of the advertised features, so this probably goes in the right direction.

--
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/CAPfivLDE627Tc6_vvHzZz0nu-hrLZSxEyxucPoxX9QzZi7wmEQ%40mail.gmail.com.

ogondza

unread,
Jun 21, 2016, 1:02:17 PM6/21/16
to Jenkins Developers
I consider backporting to be close. All was backported except for JENKINS-35641 and JENKINS-34923 where I would like it to have some extra soaking time. Note that I will not be able to attend the Governance meeting (travelling) so I will proceed with the rc at the closest time I am available unless I hear some objection, either here or in meeting logs, or the ATH will fail seriously.

--
oliver

Oleg Nenashev

unread,
Jun 21, 2016, 1:09:00 PM6/21/16
to JenkinsCI Developers
Thanks a lot for your efforts!
The RC branch looks good to me

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "Jenkins Developers" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/jenkinsci-dev/ieXnaHVqX3k/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to jenkinsci-de...@googlegroups.com.

Oleg Nenashev

unread,
Jun 22, 2016, 5:45:28 PM6/22/16
to Jenkins Developers
Hi,

Sorry for being a slowpoke.
@Oliver @KK If you have not started the RC release yet, maybe makes sense to pick remoting-2.60. It contains several important fixes (see changelog), which has been soaked for about 1 week. IMHO it would be useful to pick this version.

I'm planning to maintain an LTS & Backporting branch in remoting for 2.7.1 baseline, so bumpong of the release would be useful in order to avoid full backporting for the next release.

BR, Oleg

вторник, 21 июня 2016 г., 19:09:00 UTC+2 пользователь Oleg Nenashev написал:
Thanks a lot for your efforts!
The RC branch looks good to me
2016-06-21 19:02 GMT+02:00 ogondza <ogo...@gmail.com>:
I consider backporting to be close. All was backported except for JENKINS-35641 and JENKINS-34923 where I would like it to have some extra soaking time. Note that I will not be able to attend the Governance meeting (travelling) so I will proceed with the rc at the closest time I am available unless I hear some objection, either here or in meeting logs, or the ATH will fail seriously.

--
oliver

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "Jenkins Developers" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/jenkinsci-dev/ieXnaHVqX3k/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to jenkinsci-dev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

Mark Waite

unread,
Jun 30, 2016, 8:43:44 AM6/30/16
to Jenkins Developers
It appears that the 2.7.1 RC which I've been testing includes remoting-2.59, rather than remoting-2.60.  Oliver, can you confirm that is intentional?

Mark Waite


On Wednesday, June 22, 2016 at 3:45:28 PM UTC-6, Oleg Nenashev wrote:
Hi,

Sorry for being a slowpoke.
@Oliver @KK If you have not started the RC release yet, maybe makes sense to pick remoting-2.60. It contains several important fixes (see changelog), which has been soaked for about 1 week. IMHO it would be useful to pick this version.

I'm planning to maintain an LTS & Backporting branch in remoting for 2.7.1 baseline, so bumpong of the release would be useful in order to avoid full backporting for the next release.

BR, Oleg

вторник, 21 июня 2016 г., 19:09:00 UTC+2 пользователь Oleg Nenashev написал:
Thanks a lot for your efforts!
The RC branch looks good to me
2016-06-21 19:02 GMT+02:00 ogondza <ogo...@gmail.com>:
I consider backporting to be close. All was backported except for JENKINS-35641 and JENKINS-34923 where I would like it to have some extra soaking time. Note that I will not be able to attend the Governance meeting (travelling) so I will proceed with the rc at the closest time I am available unless I hear some objection, either here or in meeting logs, or the ATH will fail seriously.

--
oliver

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "Jenkins Developers" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/jenkinsci-dev/ieXnaHVqX3k/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to jenkinsci-de...@googlegroups.com.

Oleg Nenashev

unread,
Jun 30, 2016, 9:04:26 AM6/30/16
to JenkinsCI Developers
If remoting 2.60 didn't get into the RC, I would vote against bumping the version without re-spinning RC. If we don't want to re-spin the RC, it should be perfectly fine to keep the version as is.

All 2.60 fixes are actually [node/client]-side fixes, so Jenkins users can get them by updating slave.jar files.

BR, Oleg


Mark Waite

unread,
Jun 30, 2016, 9:07:53 AM6/30/16
to Jenkins Developers
Thanks.

I also see that http://pkg.jenkins-ci.org/debian-stable-rc/ seems to only have RC versions through 1.642.2.  I was hoping to use "aptitude" on one of my Debian machines as an easy way to test the release candidate, but it doesn't seem to be available there.

Likewise for http://pkg.jenkins-ci.org/redhat-stable-rc/ .  It seems to only have RC versions through 1.642.2.

Thanks,
Mark Waite

Arnaud Héritier

unread,
Jul 4, 2016, 12:24:08 PM7/4/16
to jenkin...@googlegroups.com
On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 3:04 PM, Oleg Nenashev <o.v.ne...@gmail.com> wrote:
If remoting 2.60 didn't get into the RC, I would vote against bumping the version without re-spinning RC. If we don't want to re-spin the RC, it should be perfectly fine to keep the version as is.

All 2.60 fixes are actually [node/client]-side fixes, so Jenkins users can get them by updating slave.jar files.


If you are using ssh slaves you have to not use the automated deployment/update of the slave.jar which is not easy if you have many slaves
It is the main issue for people who are using JNPL slaves because they have to keep them up-to-date manually

 

BR, Oleg

Oleg Nenashev

unread,
Jul 4, 2016, 12:27:03 PM7/4/16
to JenkinsCI Developers
> If you are using ssh slaves you have to not use the automated deployment/update of the slave.jar which is not easy if you have many slaves

For SSH slaves it's fixable as well, because you can specify a custom command line with a path to your slave.jar. I had to heavily use it on my previous instances, because we had our own remoting fork.

But I agree it complicates the things a bit

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "Jenkins Developers" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/jenkinsci-dev/ieXnaHVqX3k/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to jenkinsci-de...@googlegroups.com.

Arnaud Héritier

unread,
Jul 4, 2016, 12:46:19 PM7/4/16
to jenkin...@googlegroups.com
yes technically possible but difficult if you have a lot of slave. I agree.

--
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/CAPfivLADFEY%2Be6-d_X4mGQ7wdWJa%3DxY4HzyRggWk%2BXTHTO%2BQKQ%40mail.gmail.com.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages