Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add Configuration as Code test + update to Jenkins 2.222.1 as a minimum requirement #13

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Jul 6, 2020

Conversation

MRamonLeon
Copy link
Contributor

@MRamonLeon MRamonLeon commented Jul 3, 2020

Add Configuration as Code (CasC) test to certify the plugin works well with CasC

@varyvol @alecharp @rsandell

@MRamonLeon
Copy link
Contributor Author

I'm listed as maintainer: https://github.com/jenkins-infra/repository-permissions-updater/blob/master/permissions/plugin-jdk-tool.yml but I have no rights in this repo.

Could any maintainer give me access please? @aheritier @oleg-nenashev @jglick @dwnusbaum

@aheritier
Copy link
Member

@MRamonLeon you should be added in teams/jdk-tool-plugin-developers
I cannot do it. Not sure why it's not the case cc @daniel-beck

@oleg-nenashev oleg-nenashev changed the title Add Configuration as Code test Add Configuration as Code test + update to Jenkins 2.222.1 as a minimum requirement Jul 6, 2020
Copy link
Member

@oleg-nenashev oleg-nenashev left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Please use the Jenkins core version aligned with minimum version supported in https://github.com/jenkinsci/bom . Otherwise it will be harder to pick-up the new plugin's release in Plugin BOM

Copy link
Member

@oleg-nenashev oleg-nenashev left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Sorry if my comment was not clear enough. I meant the minimum supported Jenkins version. Currently it is 2.176 in BOM: https://github.com/jenkinsci/bom/tree/master/bom-2.176.x

@MRamonLeon
Copy link
Contributor Author

I used this one because it's the one we've used for other CasC plugins, but the test works, so I guess we can use this lower version. Pinging @alecharp just in case I miss something regarding a required minimum version for CasC.

@jglick
Copy link
Member

jglick commented Jul 6, 2020

You can go back to 2.222.x as far as I am concerned. There is no difficulty handling plugins with baselines newer than the minimum currently supported by the BOM. It just means subsequent updates are not applied to the older lines.

<relativePath />
</parent>
<artifactId>jdk-tool</artifactId>
<version>1.5-SNAPSHOT</version>
<packaging>hpi</packaging>
<properties>
<jenkins.version>2.112</jenkins.version>
<jenkins.version>2.176.1</jenkins.version>
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

or

Suggested change
<jenkins.version>2.176.1</jenkins.version>
<jenkins.version>2.222.3</jenkins.version>

<dependencies>
<dependency>
<groupId>io.jenkins.tools.bom</groupId>
<artifactId>bom-2.176.x</artifactId>
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

if so,

Suggested change
<artifactId>bom-2.176.x</artifactId>
<artifactId>bom-2.222.x</artifactId>

to match

pom.xml Outdated
@@ -4,14 +4,14 @@
<parent>
<groupId>org.jenkins-ci.plugins</groupId>
<artifactId>plugin</artifactId>
<version>3.57</version>
<version>4.2</version>
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
<version>4.2</version>
<version>4.3</version>

@MRamonLeon MRamonLeon merged commit 9b72725 into jenkinsci:master Jul 6, 2020
@MRamonLeon MRamonLeon deleted the casc-tests branch July 6, 2020 15:22
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants