IMHO BOM specification should be created and documented properly, maybe using one of standard YAML specification languages.
Even with the comments above, I think that the BOM is actually useful and should be finalized. Why?
So I am +1 regarding finalizing BOM as JEP.
Bes regards,
Oleg
Bes regards,
Oleg
On Tuesday, May 1, 2018 at 3:17:44 PM UTC+2, Jesse Glick wrote:On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 4:47 PM, R. Tyler Croy <ty...@monkeypox.org> wrote:
> If an update-incrementals tool existed, then yes, that would address my
> concerns here.
OK, good to know I am not completely off base here.
> I more wanted to make sure that we weren't going to have two
> or three implementations of what `update-incrementals` effectively should be
> providing.
There might be two or three scripts to deal with different syntaxes;
for example, it would be useful to have an equivalent to `mvn
versions:use-latest-releases` which grokked Incrementals and updated a
`pom.xml`. But yes they should share an underlying library of some
kind.
--
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/542d0afb-86bd-4f00-a714-96a2bec639b4%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
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/pR2ZQMj95Zc/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to jenkinsci-dev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/CANfRfr09_dhT%3D6ataL2iMF%3D7sGex49a%3DR6hbNn50-x3wGCrJ%2BA%40mail.gmail.com.
--
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/pR2ZQMj95Zc/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to jenkinsci-dev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/CANfRfr27AogB1URmHPF8sh%2B4ACS4u0qCG9RVOVnTazKg6edimg%40mail.gmail.com.
I believe the only think which needs to be resolved which is likely just an
obsolete part of the example YAML. The root `status` key in the YAML for a
"realized" BOM I don't believe we've ever actually used and is worth removing.
--
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/pR2ZQMj95Zc/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to jenkinsci-dev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/20180806224950.GC17800%40grape.lasagna.io.
--
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/pR2ZQMj95Zc/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/20180814153826.GH17800%40grape.lasagna.io.
--
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/20180814153826.GH17800%40grape.lasagna.io.
I would suggest dropping `status` and having all plugins which are to be included explicitly listed in the main and environment sections
Then for each plugin, add a mandatory boolean `transitive` attribute.
Also it is unclear how well `environments` will work when we have a
bunch. Currently `aws-global-configuration` & `artifact-manager-s3` &
`ec2` are specified in the main section as well as `aws-ec2-cloud`,
which seems like a mistake—presumably they should be listed only in
`aws-ec2-cloud`. But then when there are common library plugins used
in several environments but _not_ in all, we will have duplicated
`version`s (a likely source of developer error) unless some equivalent
to Maven’s `<dependencyManagement>` is introduced.