18:01:03 #startmeeting 18:01:03 Let the Jenkins meeting commence! 18:01:13 #chair rtyler hare_brain abayer 18:01:13 Current chairs: abayer hare_brain kohsuke rtyler 18:01:22 #info https://wiki.jenkins-ci.org/display/JENKINS/Governance+Meeting+Agenda 18:01:31 #topic backporting 18:01:50 I have the entire dev thread unread :-( 18:02:23 but Maven 3.1 change seems like a highly desirable feature 18:02:31 vjuranek: ^^ 18:02:52 a bit dangerous but certainly desirable 18:03:19 Yeah 18:03:34 In a way, the audience of LTS shouldn't be the kind of people who jump on to the latest Maven release 18:04:24 12 votes https://issues.jenkins-ci.org/browse/JENKINS-15935 18:04:27 JENKINS-15935:Can't build using maven 3.1.0 (Resolved) http://jenkins-ci.org/issue/15935 18:05:06 True, no one is forcing them to run 3.1.0. 18:05:07 I backported it in my git branch, but I wasn't completely sure it it should be included as it's more like feature request + I don't have enough time to check if it's backported properly (but tests pass) 18:05:50 Until I've heard that you've already done the work, I was inclined to say push this out to 1.509.4 or the next LTS 18:05:52 If we do not backport it, IMHO we at least need to clearly *report* that 3.1.0 is unsupported. 18:06:04 Because currently you just get a nasty NCDFE. 18:06:34 Which from a user perspective was completely unexpected. 18:07:37 I don't feel too strongly one way or the other, but if it's up to me, skipping would be my call 18:07:57 Then I suggest a small fix to the process factory to detect 3.1.0 on the remote side and abort with a clean message. 18:08:15 Did something similar recently for JDK 5. 18:08:51 vjuranek: ? 18:08:58 * vjuranek thinks 18:09:36 given my time constrains, I would either backport it (already done) or leave it as it is 18:10:01 Googling "NoClassDefFoundError: org/apache/maven/cli/MavenLoggerManager" would bring JENKINS-15935 at the top, so anyone worth a dime would be able to pinpoint the cause 18:10:03 JENKINS-15935:Can't build using maven 3.1.0 (Resolved) http://jenkins-ci.org/issue/15935 18:10:05 or no problem to iclude this small fix if somene implements it:-) 18:11:25 as for backporting, I have no storng preference as well (one of the reasons I bring it to the meeting) 18:11:33 Is it fair to summarize this as "JENKINS-15935 will miss 1.509.3. If anyone wants to make the failure mode nicer, he is welcome. 18:11:35 JENKINS-15935:Can't build using maven 3.1.0 (Resolved) http://jenkins-ci.org/issue/15935 18:12:28 MavenVersionCallable.call() can check ≥ 3.1.0 and throw IOException, perhaps 18:12:44 #agreed JENKINS-15935 will miss the 1.509.3 train. If anyone wants to make the failure mode nicer (by detecting and reporting Maven 3.1), please feel welcome 18:12:45 JENKINS-15935:Can't build using maven 3.1.0 (Resolved) http://jenkins-ci.org/issue/15935 18:13:05 I think jglick is volunteering for the latter part 18:13:12 I guess so! 18:13:16 sound good to me (and backport is eventually prepared for 1.509.4) 18:13:51 Might be worth improving Maven tests to run the tests with different Maven versions 18:13:57 I think right now it only uses one version 18:14:07 No, they run on 2.2.1, 3.0, 3.1 18:14:19 oh ok. 18:14:25 I love the problems that are already solved by other people 18:14:36 Especially when the other person is olamy. 18:14:40 #topic Schedule Credentials:1.6, SSH Credentials 1.0, SSH Slaves 1.0 for integration in 1.509.4 if there is one 18:15:08 Why? 18:15:19 stephenc said I should defend this proposition on behalf of him but he didn't tell me why this is important 18:15:36 :-) 18:16:10 Unless we are generally updating all bundled plugins I see no reason why these should be special. 18:16:18 Yeah 18:16:39 Well, the proposal is for the next LTS, so I'm going to sync up with him again as to why he thinks this is important 18:17:01 #action kohsuke to post a blog about his [NOTICE] post and call for the need for updating all at once 18:17:35 I hope this post doesn't mean those plugins have broken compatibility... 18:17:45 I think they did. Ideally the Jenkins plugin metadata could express that. 18:17:53 it can 18:18:33 In my reading of his post I don't think any of them is compatibility breaking 18:18:44 ssh-credentials: 1.0 18:18:45 It's just that the upgrade is one way (SSH credentials) 18:18:51 oh ok 18:18:55 oh boy 18:19:25 Not sure whether he meant only that the upgrade is one way, or whether something explodes if you only upgrade one of them. 18:19:48 it'd be good to check the code 18:20:05 * kohsuke brings touches the bytecode compatibility transformer on his hip 18:20:27 I'll check with stephenc to find out 18:20:42 I.e. ssh-credentials 1.0 + ssh-slaves 0.x = ? 18:21:02 oh looks like we already have an aswer in the dev list 18:21:09 it does blow up: http://pastebin.com/F5e9rTVX 18:21:19 I think that means that your SSH slaves will not find any credentials. 18:22:02 The pastebin snippet I think meant that Plugin Manager allowed him to upgrade ssh-slaves 1.0 while ssh-credentials was 0.x, which is a bug incore. 18:22:23 (The kind of issue OSGi would catch.) 18:22:39 OK, that's fixable 18:23:06 let me file that 18:23:28 I guess I have already done that: https://issues.jenkins-ci.org/browse/JENKINS-18608 18:23:30 JENKINS-18608:When updating a plugin, check versions of dependencies (Open) http://jenkins-ci.org/issue/18608 18:23:50 If you upgrade just ssh-credentials, existing credentials will get converted, so the old slave launcher will never find them. 18:24:07 I.e. they would not appear in the list of credentials to pick. 18:24:25 Probably easily resolved by upgrading ssh-slaves too. 18:25:01 "Breaks" header would have been useful like the one you find in *.deb 18:25:32 oh well 18:25:50 Let's close the meeting 18:26:06 What about backporting the Stapler fix? 18:26:11 Did that get taken care of? 18:26:11 #action kohsuke to circle back on stephenc to find out why these plugins should be in 1.409.4 18:26:28 I guess now I see his argument --- it's because it has to be updated all at once 18:26:39 saves troubles if we do it for users 18:26:50 stapler fix? 18:26:58 https://github.com/stapler/stapler/commit/fb1fa99985058151732a73c1a071383dbd20e116 18:26:58 https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/jenkinsci-dev/QoXu9XJ5zbs/Qyg5tcPXFKQJ 18:27:26 JENKINS-18776 18:27:28 JENKINS-18776:@QueryParameter with @RelativePath broken (Resolved) http://jenkins-ci.org/issue/18776 18:27:55 Hey! The topic I am after 18:27:59 I think in the past I've been liberal about updating stapler/winstone/etc versions in LTS 18:28:02 Backporting the fix in jenkinsci/jenkins means pulling in months’ worth of over changes. 18:28:15 Including at least one known serious regression. 18:28:32 You guys move off my agenda item already? 18:28:48 JENKINS-18641 18:28:50 JENKINS-18641:People View does Not Populate (makeStaplerProxy) (Reopened) http://jenkins-ci.org/issue/18641 18:29:06 let's take care of the stapler fix first and we can come back to credential plugins 18:29:12 stephenc_: yes but could circle back to it if need be 18:29:12 #topic backporting stapler fix 18:29:47 I just care if I have a "go" in principle 18:30:01 I can check what else went in between 1.207 to 1.214 but I tend to prefer picking existing releases 18:30:11 as opposed to have 1.207.1 18:30:26 Then can we get JENKINS-18641 fixed in 1.215 or whatever? 18:30:28 JENKINS-18641:People View does Not Populate (makeStaplerProxy) (Reopened) http://jenkins-ci.org/issue/18641 18:30:36 In my mind if whatever stapler release passes the soak time rule I'm good 18:30:48 Either by reverting the original change, or adjusting it somehow. 18:31:05 that went in after 1.207? 18:31:21 is that why ogondza is asking for 1.207.1? 18:31:28 yes 18:31:29 (if so, I'd be happy to create that, too) 18:31:45 See thread: “RE: JENKINS-18641: Changes to Stapler's JavaScript proxy will break plugins depending on it” 18:31:47 JENKINS-18641:People View does Not Populate (makeStaplerProxy) (Reopened) http://jenkins-ci.org/issue/18641 18:32:15 the 2 commits are backported already. tests passes 18:32:45 oh ok, then sounds like the least I can do is to do 1.207.1 18:32:47 rsandell thinks there might be a simple fix for JENKINS-18641 (which would be in core, so no need to change Stapler version) 18:32:49 JENKINS-18641:People View does Not Populate (makeStaplerProxy) (Reopened) http://jenkins-ci.org/issue/18641 18:33:27 and just for the record I believe anyone can release stapler 18:33:29 at least that's my intent 18:33:31 If that in fact works (have not yet tried it myself), would we rather go that way? 18:33:46 (kohsuke: distribution to gh-pages was the issue IIRC) 18:34:22 "If that [simple 18641 fix] in fact works (have not yet tried it myself), would we rather go that [releasing 1.215] way?" ? 18:34:30 right 18:34:48 i.e. + 18:34:50 Then it sounds like I should be working on this ASAP 18:35:04 :-) 18:35:26 So here's what I'll do. 18:35:39 I'll release 1.207.1 sine ogondza did all the hard work 18:35:49 And I'll work on JENKINS-18641 18:35:50 kohsuke: if you are checking it, you can use cloudbees-template as a test case. 18:35:51 JENKINS-18641:People View does Not Populate (makeStaplerProxy) (Reopened) http://jenkins-ci.org/issue/18641 18:36:14 if that fix comes up in time and we are happy, we'd propose bundling 1.215 18:36:39 but 1.509.3 can always fall back to 1.207.1 18:36:47 1.216 actually. 18:36:53 Or not, 1.217. 18:36:56 whatever 18:37:11 stapler+18641 fix 18:37:33 Or sorry no, 1.215, since the proposed fix is in core. 18:37:37 ogondza: Is that satisfiable? 18:38:04 sure 18:38:08 I.e. stable branch already specifies 1.215; we just need to check if reverting the existing workaround in core, and adding the proposed workaround in core, solves the originally reported issue as well as those in plugins. 18:38:29 Or 1.214 I mean is in stable. 18:38:40 Sorry for confusion. 18:38:42 OK 18:39:16 #topic SSH credentials 18:39:25 stephenc: ^^ 18:39:42 I think we lost him 18:39:57 #topic next meeting 18:40:04 _stephenc: ? 18:40:11 nope, gone 18:40:25 #info next meetin would be in Aug 21st 18:40:50 #endmeeting