18:02:07 #startmeeting 18:02:07 Let the Jenkins meeting commence! 18:02:15 #chair rtyler hare_brain danielbeck 18:02:15 Current chairs: danielbeck hare_brain kohsuke rtyler 18:02:32 #topic recap of actions 18:02:47 there were none from last time 18:02:59 from earlier: 18:03:38 Should we move to the next one? 18:03:40 KK granted me LDAP admin access to I could add myself to the admins group to build the list of Artifactory admins, but it looks like that group does not govern Artifactory admin access, so he'll need to be more involved there 18:03:58 hmm 18:04:16 That's odd, but let's work on that 18:04:21 #jenkins-meeting is pending the bot joining the channel, I think something's wrong with jenkins-infra or my understanding of it. Will dig deeper. 18:04:43 docker containers won't auto restart I. Is that it? 18:04:51 probably 18:05:03 only saw 5 minutes ago that rtyler merged my PR into prod 18:05:56 Should we move on to the next topic? 18:06:01 sec 18:06:26 We blessed the travel grant program last time, but KK was overly specific as to which revision and it was an outdated one 18:06:36 oops 18:07:05 I just put the page up to link to the one that was current during the meeting 18:07:26 just FYI in case someone stumbles upon this, I don't think this matters too much 18:07:32 yeah 18:07:52 not trying to get my evil changes in there without review :-) 18:07:56 that's it from me 18:08:31 #topic LTS backporting status check 18:08:38 ogondza: all yours 18:08:42 only 3 backports this time 18:08:57 ogondza Thanks for the expedited backport of the stephenc fix 18:08:57 including the deadlock Stephen and Daniel wanted 18:09:08 we are ready 18:09:22 Yay 18:09:25 https://github.com/jenkinsci/jenkins/pull/1825 18:09:27 for context 18:09:33 danielbeck: it would be greate if some of you can give it some extra testing during the rc period 18:09:52 ogondza Yep I already pinged stephenc about this 18:09:54 #agreed release is ready 18:10:01 danielbeck: thanks 18:10:05 #action kohsuke needs to give means for danielbeck to annotate release notes 18:10:19 ... for this is the LTS that requires Java7 dependency 18:10:53 #topic Protect master branches of repositories 18:11:02 and the unannounced config.xml/home layout changes in 1.609.x were already a mess. We don't have a real LTS changelog, and that needs to change. With Java 7 being required now it's especially important. 18:11:34 I intended to protect core's master agains deletion andforce pushes 18:11:42 ogondza: yeah, seems like a no brainer 18:11:50 are any other branches we want to protect? 18:11:53 only core? 18:12:02 can we sugges this for all plugin maintainers? 18:12:03 why just limit ourselves to core? 18:12:44 I do not think appling this everywhere is a good idea 18:12:49 ogondza stable-xxx? 18:12:59 This calls for creating a maintenance script to groom our repositories. 18:13:13 Also useful for disabling issue trackers and fixing team/repo assignments 18:13:18 danielbeck: it would require to add those every 12 weeks 18:13:29 and I always have the updated copy :P 18:13:59 kohsuke GitHub is rolling out a new permissions model where users can be granted privileges individually. So we could get rid of groups. I have a few ideas here, but not today 18:14:07 ok 18:14:32 so, do we want to protect master in every repo? 18:14:55 IMO yes, otherwise it won't prevent the accident that happened before 18:15:17 well, it wont. I do not feel strongly 18:15:18 That's the stated goal, right? 18:15:29 Any reasons not to? 18:15:36 lets go with that 18:15:52 danielbeck: is that OK? 18:16:07 have we discussed this on the dev list? 18:16:21 danielbeck: no relevant comments 18:16:38 https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/jenkinsci-dev/0ciUju7raOA 18:17:12 perhaps we should announce this and wait for people to complain while we prepare the automation 18:17:23 sounds good 18:17:30 sounds good. Plus let's be open to people who want it removed 18:17:37 let's record the agreement and we'd naturally take some time before we can execute it 18:17:49 if we hear back in the mean time we'll reconsider 18:18:14 how to opt out? whitelist in infra repo with the script? 18:18:48 BTW I have an idea rattling around in my head that would allow removing Everyone and its the default-write permission without impacting contributors. More on the dev list soon. 18:19:10 danielbeck: should we postpone this? 18:19:10 still, protecting master is a good idea. 18:19:17 ah, ok 18:19:17 opt out is probably a white list for the script 18:19:46 for now we could add it to the jenkins-admin bot and run the script only once 18:19:55 #agreed we will start protecting the master branch of all repos in the jenkinsci org from force push, as well as additional key branches in the core repo. 18:20:18 #agreed if anyone disagrees, please let us know sooner than later. 18:20:43 should we move on? 18:20:51 right 18:21:14 #topic next meeting 18:21:25 Next meeting is Sep 30th the same time 18:21:40 #endmeeting