Temporary ownership request for Project Description Setter Plugin

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
9 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Temporary ownership request for Project Description Setter Plugin

Oleg Nenashev
Hi all,

We have discovered that Project Description Setter plugin is not compatible with the incoming JEP-200 in 2.102 (other discovered issues are listed here). The plugin is maintained by Bap, who is known to be no longer active in the Jenkins project. The last release of the plugin was 6 years ago, but the plugin is not officially open for adoption. But I think it can be considered as implied in this case.

I would like to temporary take ownership of the plugin and to deliver the patch prepared by Jesse. In such case 2000 users of the plugin won't hit the issue while updating to new Jenkins versions. After the release I will be monitoring the plugin for a couple of months, and I will fix the regressions if any.

Would everybody be fine with that?

Thanks in advance,
Oleg

--
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 [hidden email].
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/080269ff-36a7-4de8-93b6-4360eae9df51%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Temporary ownership request for Project Description Setter Plugin

Mark Waite-2
That's great for me.

Mark Waite

On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 2:51 PM Oleg Nenashev <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi all,

We have discovered that Project Description Setter plugin is not compatible with the incoming JEP-200 in 2.102 (other discovered issues are listed here). The plugin is maintained by Bap, who is known to be no longer active in the Jenkins project. The last release of the plugin was 6 years ago, but the plugin is not officially open for adoption. But I think it can be considered as implied in this case.

I would like to temporary take ownership of the plugin and to deliver the patch prepared by Jesse. In such case 2000 users of the plugin won't hit the issue while updating to new Jenkins versions. After the release I will be monitoring the plugin for a couple of months, and I will fix the regressions if any.

Would everybody be fine with that?

Thanks in advance,
Oleg

--
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 [hidden email].
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/080269ff-36a7-4de8-93b6-4360eae9df51%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
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 [hidden email].
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/CAO49JtEayzV0H9h%3Do7FdG%2Bh8w8o60fsD-kbbYV2wTHK5BHn6Xw%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Temporary ownership request for Project Description Setter Plugin

slide
Sounds awesome, thanks for taking on the responsibility for this!

Alex

On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 2:55 PM Mark Waite <[hidden email]> wrote:
That's great for me.

Mark Waite

On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 2:51 PM Oleg Nenashev <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi all,

We have discovered that Project Description Setter plugin is not compatible with the incoming JEP-200 in 2.102 (other discovered issues are listed here). The plugin is maintained by Bap, who is known to be no longer active in the Jenkins project. The last release of the plugin was 6 years ago, but the plugin is not officially open for adoption. But I think it can be considered as implied in this case.

I would like to temporary take ownership of the plugin and to deliver the patch prepared by Jesse. In such case 2000 users of the plugin won't hit the issue while updating to new Jenkins versions. After the release I will be monitoring the plugin for a couple of months, and I will fix the regressions if any.

Would everybody be fine with that?

Thanks in advance,
Oleg

--
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 [hidden email].
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/080269ff-36a7-4de8-93b6-4360eae9df51%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
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 [hidden email].
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/CAO49JtEayzV0H9h%3Do7FdG%2Bh8w8o60fsD-kbbYV2wTHK5BHn6Xw%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
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 [hidden email].
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/CAPiUgVf73nJuuhfqzHGdoBCH-%3D_LRngOY1YEAWmGhD8G7ivBdQ%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Temporary ownership request for Project Description Setter Plugin

Daniel Beck
In reply to this post by Oleg Nenashev

> On 12. Jan 2018, at 22:51, Oleg Nenashev <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> I would like to temporary take ownership of the plugin and to deliver the patch prepared by Jesse. In such case 2000 users of the plugin won't hit the issue while updating to new Jenkins versions. After the release I will be monitoring the plugin for a couple of months, and I will fix the regressions if any.
>
> Would everybody be fine with that?

Seems reasonable.

In fact I recommend you limit your responsibility here as much as possible, and don't get sucked into doing unrelated changes. So don't call it 'temporary ownership', instead 'approval to do a one off release for a specific reason'.

--
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 [hidden email].
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/EDC2C4BD-E2D8-4F6B-B86C-76C16375A098%40beckweb.net.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Temporary ownership request for Project Description Setter Plugin

Liam Newman
There are less than 2K  installs of this plugin per month.  
Perhaps a more reasonable choice would be to End-of-life this plugin? 

-L. 


On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 3:04 PM Daniel Beck <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 12. Jan 2018, at 22:51, Oleg Nenashev <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> I would like to temporary take ownership of the plugin and to deliver the patch prepared by Jesse. In such case 2000 users of the plugin won't hit the issue while updating to new Jenkins versions. After the release I will be monitoring the plugin for a couple of months, and I will fix the regressions if any.
>
> Would everybody be fine with that?

Seems reasonable.

In fact I recommend you limit your responsibility here as much as possible, and don't get sucked into doing unrelated changes. So don't call it 'temporary ownership', instead 'approval to do a one off release for a specific reason'.

--
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 [hidden email].
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/EDC2C4BD-E2D8-4F6B-B86C-76C16375A098%40beckweb.net.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
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 [hidden email].
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/CAA0qCNwrjCSHHM7wuvA7oNnL3taSgB0%2B7cMskfth__fPsBF6CA%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Temporary ownership request for Project Description Setter Plugin

Oleg Nenashev
I don't think so. Jenkins ecosystem consists of many niche plugins, and by EoLing them without obvious reason we would just destroy this ecosystem. Moreover, we even have no such process defined, we can only blacklist completely broken (e.g. target service is dead) or insecure plugins.

BR, Oleg

2018-01-13 1:14 GMT+01:00 Liam Newman <[hidden email]>:
There are less than 2K  installs of this plugin per month.  
Perhaps a more reasonable choice would be to End-of-life this plugin? 

-L. 


On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 3:04 PM Daniel Beck <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 12. Jan 2018, at 22:51, Oleg Nenashev <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> I would like to temporary take ownership of the plugin and to deliver the patch prepared by Jesse. In such case 2000 users of the plugin won't hit the issue while updating to new Jenkins versions. After the release I will be monitoring the plugin for a couple of months, and I will fix the regressions if any.
>
> Would everybody be fine with that?

Seems reasonable.

In fact I recommend you limit your responsibility here as much as possible, and don't get sucked into doing unrelated changes. So don't call it 'temporary ownership', instead 'approval to do a one off release for a specific reason'.

--
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 [hidden email].
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/EDC2C4BD-E2D8-4F6B-B86C-76C16375A098%40beckweb.net.
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/scG6cjRCqxY/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to [hidden email].
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/CAA0qCNwrjCSHHM7wuvA7oNnL3taSgB0%2B7cMskfth__fPsBF6CA%40mail.gmail.com.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
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 [hidden email].
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/CAPfivLDgYN-xpjMK-rnu4jo0%2BCX9qH%3DWAxx-MbbFw04t1bQ5%2Bg%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Temporary ownership request for Project Description Setter Plugin

Daniel Beck

> On 13. Jan 2018, at 11:31, Oleg Nenashev <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> I don't think so. Jenkins ecosystem consists of many niche plugins, and by EoLing them without obvious reason we would just destroy this ecosystem. Moreover, we even have no such process defined, we can only blacklist completely broken (e.g. target service is dead) or insecure plugins.

This hits on a larger issue. I don't think it's a reasonable expectation that every plugin written years (a decade?) ago, and not updated in several years, continues to work as it always has, in a system that allows plugins to couple as closely to core as Jenkins does.

That doesn't mean we shouldn't strive to retain compatibility if it's reasonably straightforward to do (as here, apparently), but doing it at any cost just results in the plugin ecosystem becoming a burden rather than an advantage, and Jenkins becoming increasingly stale.

--
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 [hidden email].
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/93B2C193-8716-42DE-932C-441C11B661D6%40beckweb.net.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Temporary ownership request for Project Description Setter Plugin

Oleg Nenashev
I agree, some plugins are going to die due to the lack of maintenance. No proposal to retain compatibility at "any cost" for sure. My point is that "few users, no maintainers" is not enough to End of Life the plugin. I think we need to work harder on promoting plugin adoptions (start sending brand-new "I adopted a plugins" T-shorts for that? Probably JEP).

BR, Oleg


суббота, 13 января 2018 г., 18:33:59 UTC+1 пользователь Daniel Beck написал:

> On 13. Jan 2018, at 11:31, Oleg Nenashev <<a href="javascript:" target="_blank" gdf-obfuscated-mailto="leAlRXuxAQAJ" rel="nofollow" onmousedown="this.href=&#39;javascript:&#39;;return true;" onclick="this.href=&#39;javascript:&#39;;return true;">o.v.ne...@...> wrote:
>
> I don't think so. Jenkins ecosystem consists of many niche plugins, and by EoLing them without obvious reason we would just destroy this ecosystem. Moreover, we even have no such process defined, we can only blacklist completely broken (e.g. target service is dead) or insecure plugins.

This hits on a larger issue. I don't think it's a reasonable expectation that every plugin written years (a decade?) ago, and not updated in several years, continues to work as it always has, in a system that allows plugins to couple as closely to core as Jenkins does.

That doesn't mean we shouldn't strive to retain compatibility if it's reasonably straightforward to do (as here, apparently), but doing it at any cost just results in the plugin ecosystem becoming a burden rather than an advantage, and Jenkins becoming increasingly stale.

--
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 [hidden email].
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/5211d7a2-c8cd-4e0d-b8b6-04da17e5d219%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Temporary ownership request for Project Description Setter Plugin

slide
I've been meaning to write a JEP for deprecating plugins for various reasons (against code of conduct, replaced by newer plugins, security issues, etc), but haven't had the time, perhaps I'll look at it again.

On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 12:16 AM Oleg Nenashev <[hidden email]> wrote:
I agree, some plugins are going to die due to the lack of maintenance. No proposal to retain compatibility at "any cost" for sure. My point is that "few users, no maintainers" is not enough to End of Life the plugin. I think we need to work harder on promoting plugin adoptions (start sending brand-new "I adopted a plugins" T-shorts for that? Probably JEP).

BR, Oleg


суббота, 13 января 2018 г., 18:33:59 UTC+1 пользователь Daniel Beck написал:

> On 13. Jan 2018, at 11:31, Oleg Nenashev <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> I don't think so. Jenkins ecosystem consists of many niche plugins, and by EoLing them without obvious reason we would just destroy this ecosystem. Moreover, we even have no such process defined, we can only blacklist completely broken (e.g. target service is dead) or insecure plugins.

This hits on a larger issue. I don't think it's a reasonable expectation that every plugin written years (a decade?) ago, and not updated in several years, continues to work as it always has, in a system that allows plugins to couple as closely to core as Jenkins does.

That doesn't mean we shouldn't strive to retain compatibility if it's reasonably straightforward to do (as here, apparently), but doing it at any cost just results in the plugin ecosystem becoming a burden rather than an advantage, and Jenkins becoming increasingly stale.

--
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 [hidden email].
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/5211d7a2-c8cd-4e0d-b8b6-04da17e5d219%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
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 [hidden email].
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/CAPiUgVe9LwLmGHkrRMY7QrDww1BU%3DaYEK0gycyzpB195v_2-xw%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.