Backporting 1.509.4 complete

[oliver gondža]

Hi,

I have finished backporting issues for 1.509.4. On governance meeting, we
agreed that this is the very last minor release based on 1.509. We have 5
blockers and 8 critical fixes backported, 35 issues in total[1]. All 4
issues rejected from 1.509.3 will be present in 1.509.4.

Kohsuke, please post RC.

[1]
https://issues.jenkins-ci.org/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?reset=true&jqlQuery=project+%3D+10172+AND+labels+%3D+%221.509.4-fixed%22

--
oliver

[Christoph Kutzinski]

We have https://issues.jenkins-ci.org/browse/JENKINS-15935 in this,
which *may* have caused https://issues.jenkins-ci.org/browse/JENKINS-19352
Can someone confirm (or disprove) that JENKINS-19352 is observable in
the LTS branch? I'll try to find some time this weekend to confirm myself.

cheers
Kutzi

[Kohsuke Kawaguchi]

On 10/03/2013 05:46 AM, oliver gond�a wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have finished backporting issues for 1.509.4. On governance meeting, we
> agreed that this is the very last minor release based on 1.509. We have 5
> blockers and 8 critical fixes backported, 35 issues in total[1]. All 4
> issues rejected from 1.509.3 will be present in 1.509.4.
>
> Kohsuke, please post RC.

Done. See http://mirrors.jenkins-ci.org/

>
> [1]
> https://issues.jenkins-ci.org/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?reset=true&jqlQuery=project+%3D+10172+AND+labels+%3D+%221.509.4-fixed%22
>
> --
> oliver
>

--
Kohsuke Kawaguchi | CloudBees, Inc. | http://cloudbees.com/
Try Jenkins Enterprise, our professional version of Jenkins

[Mirko Friedenhagen]

Hello Kohsuke,

when surfing to http://mirrors.jenkins-ci.org/war-stable/ I only see
1.503.3 from September 9th.

Regards
Mirko
Regards Mirko
--
http://illegalstateexception.blogspot.com/
https://github.com/mfriedenhagen/
https://bitbucket.org/mfriedenhagen/


On Fri, Oct 4, 2013 at 9:03 PM, Kohsuke Kawaguchi
<kkawa...@cloudbees.com> wrote:

> --
> 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/groups/opt_out.

[Kohsuke Kawaguchi]

Note that this is stable-rc. You should look under
http://mirrors.jenkins-ci.org/war-stable-rc/

[Christoph Kutzinski]

It's okay.
I could disprove that JENKINS-19352 is present in the LTS.
I could see the extraneous logging added described in https://issues.jenkins-ci.org/browse/JENKINS-19396 , though, but that should IMO not prevent the LTS release.

cheers
Kutzi

Am 04.10.2013 15:47, schrieb Christoph Kutzinski:

We have https://issues.jenkins-ci.org/browse/JENKINS-15935 in this, which *may* have caused https://issues.jenkins-ci.org/browse/JENKINS-19352
Can someone confirm (or disprove) that JENKINS-19352 is observable in the LTS branch? I'll try to find some time this weekend to confirm myself.

cheers
Kutzi

[domi]

But it should not really raise questions if would include it in the LTS…

In my opinion we should but this in - also when looking at the number of Votes and Watchs on this issue, we should but it in….

Domi

On 05.10.2013, at 14:05, Christoph Kutzinski <ku...@gmx.de> wrote:

 prevent the LTS release.

[Christoph Kutzinski]

I'm afraid that I'm not getting what you're trying to say.

My concern was that 1.590.4 would include JENKINS-19352 via JENKINS-15935.
In that case we would IMO have no other option than to revert JENKINS-15935 in the LTS branch.

Luckily, I could disprove that JENKINS-19352 is in LTS.
But JENKINS-19396 is which is IMO minor.

So what are you saying? That we should revert JENKINS-15935?
Or include a fix for JENKINS-19352 - which doesn't exist, yet, ergo doesn't fulfill the requirements to be included in the LTS?

cheers
Kutzi

[Christoph Kutzinski]

> Or include a fix for JENKINS-19352 - which doesn't exist, yet, ergo doesn't fulfill the requirements to be included in the LTS?

Sorry, that should read, of course:
"Or include a fix for JENKINS-19396"

Am 05.10.2013 14:23, schrieb Christoph Kutzinski:

I'm afraid that I'm not getting what you're trying to say.

My concern was that 1.590.4 would include JENKINS-19352 via JENKINS-15935.
In that case we would IMO have no other option than to revert JENKINS-15935 in the LTS branch.

Luckily, I could disprove that JENKINS-19352 is in LTS.
But JENKINS-19396 is which is IMO minor.

So what are you saying? That we should revert JENKINS-15935?
Or include a fix for JENKINS-19352 - which doesn't exist, yet, ergo doesn't fulfill the requirements to be included in the LTS?

cheers
Kutzi

Am 05.10.2013 14:11, schrieb domi:

But it should not really raise questions if would include it in the LTS�

In my opinion we should but this in - also when looking at the number of Votes and Watchs on this issue, we should but it in�.

Domi

On 05.10.2013, at 14:05, Christoph Kutzinski <ku...@gmx.de> wrote:

�prevent the LTS release.

--
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/groups/opt_out.

[domi]

Sorry Kutz,

I was missing you point - but i got it now - so yes your right, everything is OK

..sorry for irritating you…

Domi

On 05.10.2013, at 14:25, Christoph Kutzinski <ku...@gmx.de> wrote:

> Or include a fix for JENKINS-19352 - which doesn't exist, yet, ergo doesn't fulfill the requirements to be included in the LTS?

Sorry, that should read, of course:
"Or include a fix for JENKINS-19396"

Am 05.10.2013 14:23, schrieb Christoph Kutzinski:

I'm afraid that I'm not getting what you're trying to say.

My concern was that 1.590.4 would include JENKINS-19352 via JENKINS-15935.
In that case we would IMO have no other option than to revert JENKINS-15935 in the LTS branch.

Luckily, I could disprove that JENKINS-19352 is in LTS.
But JENKINS-19396 is which is IMO minor.

So what are you saying? That we should revert JENKINS-15935?
Or include a fix for JENKINS-19352 - which doesn't exist, yet, ergo doesn't fulfill the requirements to be included in the LTS?

cheers
Kutzi

Am 05.10.2013 14:11, schrieb domi:

But it should not really raise questions if would include it in the LTS…

In my opinion we should but this in - also when looking at the number of Votes and Watchs on this issue, we should but it in….

Domi

On 05.10.2013, at 14:05, Christoph Kutzinski <ku...@gmx.de> wrote:

 prevent the LTS release.

--
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/groups/opt_out.

--
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/groups/opt_out.

[Marnix Klooster]

Hi all,

Any indication about when 1.509.4 will be released?  I've just upgraded from an older version to 1.509.3, and we're running into https://issues.jenkins-ci.org/browse/JENKINS-19418 for quite some jobs.

What risk is there in upgrading from 1.509.3 to 1.509.4-rc1 (Oct 4th)?

As I'm running as a Windows service, I presume I can just replace the .war-file?  And if something goes wrong, I presume I can just put the 1.509.3 .war-file back?

Thanks, and keep up the good work!

Groetjes,
 <><
Marnix Klooster

[ogondza]

Hi,

I have backported one more commit[1] Stephen wanted after the 1.509.4-rc was released. Contrary to what we have agreed on governance meeting I decided _not_ to backport JENKINS-19251 as it depends on JENKINS-16261 (which is something I should have checked before, sorry). If someone believes it's worth the risk, go ahead, I won't object.

As long as we are concerned we can roll the final release.

[1] https://github.com/jenkinsci/jenkins/commit/fb71d62ae163d39e289d9cb11b57abd9aabbef4d

--
oliver

[Kohsuke Kawaguchi]

1.509.4 is released now

2013/10/9 ogondza <ogo...@gmail.com>

--

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/groups/opt_out.

--
Kohsuke Kawaguchi

[Marnix Klooster]

Hi all,

Thanks for that release!

Note that I don't see JENKINS-19418 [1] mentioned in the LTS Changelog [2] under the 1.509.4 heading, but that issue _is_ labeled 1.509.4-fixed [3], and I can confirm the issue does not occur in 1.509.4-rc1, i.e., 1.509.4-SNAPSHOT (rc-10/04/2013 16:44 GMT-kohsuke).

I'm assuming this is a Changelog oversight, and that this fix is in 1.509.4?

Thanks!

[1] https://issues.jenkins-ci.org/browse/JENKINS-19418
[2] http://jenkins-ci.org/changelog-stable
[3] https://issues.jenkins-ci.org/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?reset=true&jqlQuery=labels+%3D+"1.509.4-fixed"

--
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/jrqc0m3u02w/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to jenkinsci-de...@googlegroups.com.

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

--
Marnix Klooster
marnix....@gmail.com

[Krull, Stephan]

Hello,

 

regarding bugfixes of long term support versions I engage you to set up some kind of event message or blog feed. Looking at the homepage and the download section I, as a consumer of LTS versions, want a reliable source of information about new versions. I have not found that until today. Maybe I missed something?

 

If I could make a suggestion: Simple solution would be a transformation of the changelog view (http://jenkins-ci.org/changelog-stable) to a RSS Feed XML.

 

Kind regards

Stephan

[Jesse Glick]

On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 1:13 AM, Marnix Klooster
<marnix....@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm assuming this is a Changelog oversight

Probably. The changelog is generated by some script which in every LTS
release I have seen produces quite inaccurate results and should not
be taken too seriously.

Normally I recreate the changelog at
http://release-notes.cloudbees.com/product/Jenkins+OSS+LTS by hand,
checking the Git history to see what really went in, taking into
consideration changes that were not properly labeled at time of
commit, or which were subsequently backed out of the stable branch,
etc. For 1.509.4 it looks like stephenc just mechanically imported the
jenkins-ci.org changelog, cloning any mistakes or omissions; when I
get a chance I may fix it up manually.

[Stephen Connolly]

mea culpa

 

when I
get a chance I may fix it up manually.

[Arnaud Héritier]

I just deployed the 1.509.4

My maven jobs are plenty of 

INFO: 
11-Oct-2013 17:51:58 org.apache.maven.cli.event.ExecutionEventLogger mojoStarted

ex : https://ci.exoplatform.org/job/gatein-portal-4.0.x-ci/67/console

Not critical but logs are less readable

Cheers,

--

-----

Arnaud Héritier

http://aheritier.net

Mail/GTalk: aheritier AT gmail DOT com

Twitter/Skype : aheritier

[Daniel Beck]

The price of Maven 3.1 support:

https://issues.jenkins-ci.org/browse/JENKINS-19396