OK! Here we are... testing time! These are the plugins that are being covered: (download links should be live in an hour or two)
scm-api 2.2.0-alpha-1 https://updates.jenkins.io/download/plugins/scm-api/2.2.0-alpha-1/scm-api.hpi branch-api 2.0.11-alpha-1 https://updates.jenkins.io/download/plugins/branch-api/2.0.11-alpha-1/branch-api.hpi git 3.4.0-alpha-1 https://updates.jenkins.io/download/plugins/git/3.4.0-alpha-1/git.hpi mercurial 2.0-alpha-1 https://updates.jenkins.io/download/plugins/mercurial/2.0-alpha-1/mercurial.hpi github-branch-source 2.2.0-alpha-1 https://updates.jenkins.io/download/plugins/github-branch-source/2.2.0-alpha-1/github-branch-source.hpi cloudbees-bitbucket-branch-source 2.2.0-alpha-1 https://updates.jenkins.io/download/plugins/cloudbees-bitbucket-branch-source/2.2.0-alpha-1/cloudbees-bitbucket-branch-source.hpi Recommended testing procedure: 1. Set up a throw-away Jenkins running a version similar to your production environment *with the pre-upgrade versions of the plugins you are using*. 2. Set up ideally at least one organization folder and one standalone multibranch project building your source code - to a first order you do not care if the builds succeed or fail, only that the branches are found. 3. Trigger a scan / index of your organization folders and standalone multibranch projects. 4. Wait for the queue to complete 5. Run the script in the system script console: https://gist.github.com/stephenc/64ef58783b4438a126ad4e3f43062df1 and save the output to smoke-pre-upgrade.txt 6. Upgrade the relevant plugins, restart Jenkins. 7. Run the script in the system script console: https://gist.github.com/stephenc/64ef58783b4438a126ad4e3f43062df1 and save the output to smoke-post-upgrade.txt 8. Trigger a scan / index of your organization folders and standalone multibranch projects. 9. Wait for the queue to complete 10. Run the script in the system script console: https://gist.github.com/stephenc/64ef58783b4438a126ad4e3f43062df1 and save the output to smoke-post-rescan.txt At this point, do a diff between smoke-pre-upgrade.txt and smoke-post-rescan.txt You are looking for three classes of difference: a. branch jobs that have been rebuilt for no reason (i.e. the revision is the same) b. branch jobs that have disappeared for no good reason (i.e. the branch is still present in the backing scm) c. branch jobs that have suddenly appeared for no good reason (i.e. the branch was there before but not found) [expecting some of these for BitBucket PRs from forks, but only after configuration updated, saved and another rescan performed] My expectation is that nobody will have these kinds of issues. Also try out the new UI to see what you think. Please report back your testing results either way. Don't forget to report back your UI feedback too ;-) After doing that test in a throw-away Jenkins, you can *optionally* repeat the test on a *more* production*-like* (emphasis on being production-like not production) instance... but this is code that has not yet completed code review (hence -alpha-1 not -beta-1) so it is at your own risk. There are additional issues to be aware when using more production-like environment: a. You may have builds that were assuming branches were full clones, now the refspec is tightly reduced to minimize clone time. If you need a full clone you will need to add the "Advanced Clone" behaviour. b. Mercurial repositories on Bitbucket Cloud do not support merge commits for PR building (yet) c. Credential domains were not being correctly compared so as a result - if you are using credential domains to help sort credentials - there may be cases where the credentials are now searched for in a different domain than you had them in, so your domains may need reconfiguration to have the credentials found by the multibranch project / org folder. d. The pipeline snippitizer is generating $class style for some of the GitHub and BitBucket specific behaviours, this is because my plan is to further consolidate the implementations and have a single shared implementation of each for these plugins, that way they can have a single @Symbol annotation... if that is too difficult then the @Symbol would need to be prefixed with gitHub / bitbucket respectively, e.g. gitHubBranches, bitbucketBranches for the discover branches behaviour. Thanks in advance -Stephen On 18 June 2017 at 15:53, Michael Kobit <mko...@gmail.com> wrote: > I may be able to help with this as well. > > On Fri, Jun 16, 2017, 17:28 Dan Tran <dant...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I will give it a spin too. >> >> Thanks >> >> -Dan >> >> On Friday, June 16, 2017 at 11:57:26 AM UTC-7, Kevin Burnett wrote: >>> >>> we'd be down to try that, yes. thanks for making these changes in a way >>> that will benefit the product long-term! >>> >>> fingers are crossed that there's already a built-in way to pretend like >>> pull requests don't exist! you're already building the branches; why also >>> build the pull requests, eh? :) >>> >>> thanks! >>> kb >>> >>> >>> On Friday, June 16, 2017 at 2:35:54 PM UTC-4, Mark Waite wrote: >>>> >>>> I'd like to be part of the beta test. >>>> >>>> Mark Waite >>>> >>>> On Fri, Jun 16, 2017 at 12:19 PM Stephen Connolly < >>>> stephen.al...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Just a quick status update. >>>>> >>>>> In final stages of this work now. Bobby is being a superstar and >>>>> reviewing my 13k LoC change on the Bitbucket branch source - brings lots >>>>> of >>>>> feature parity with GitHub and adds the configuration ability of the pure >>>>> Git branch source >>>>> >>>>> I am finalising the GitHub Branch Source changes... likely to be >>>>> another big PR >>>>> >>>>> Then there's a 5k LoC change in the Git plugin >>>>> >>>>> Plan is to try and get all merged next week and cut a beta >>>>> >>>>> I'll be looking for people to help test at that stage. >>>>> >>>>> Please respond if you think you can help (lots of bugs fixed as a side >>>>> effect of the refactoring - it makes things more easy to test => I found >>>>> and fixed bugs) >>>>> -- >>>>> Sent from my phone >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> 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/CA%2BnPnMxfYrZphgYDXFD3i%2Bo_ >>>>> 7eDn7mn2qVrzJz6wFaoVkNmc%2Bw%40mail.gmail.com >>>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/CA%2BnPnMxfYrZphgYDXFD3i%2Bo_7eDn7mn2qVrzJz6wFaoVkNmc%2Bw%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>>>> . >>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>>>> >>>> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Jenkins Users" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to jenkinsci-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/ >> msgid/jenkinsci-users/5dd15ac2-b8a2-4ebd-bb4a- >> 3bffa4815227%40googlegroups.com >> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-users/5dd15ac2-b8a2-4ebd-bb4a-3bffa4815227%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >> . >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >> > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Jenkins Users" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to jenkinsci-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/ > msgid/jenkinsci-users/CALELY9GHbX4WuHdDKM8-bU1xR5voh- > NsfHeQXNAxMjJpXkiwrw%40mail.gmail.com > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-users/CALELY9GHbX4WuHdDKM8-bU1xR5voh-NsfHeQXNAxMjJpXkiwrw%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Jenkins Users" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to jenkinsci-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-users/CA%2BnPnMxsBSEihW2YuGnT10tECCdbOeg37ArgTfs2St1ecupFFg%40mail.gmail.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
