If we request the pipeline template plugin to be installed, that would help reduce the amount of boilerplate needed in the new Jenkins. I could help with that.
On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 22:00 Gilles Sadowski <gillese...@gmail.com> wrote: > 2020-07-23 3:35 UTC+02:00, Torsten Curdt <tcu...@vafer.org>: > >> > >> > I realize that a local build seems to be your gold standard. > >> > >> Not mine. "Commons". > >> > > > > You are arguing for it. > > No I'm not. It (i.e "maven", "svn" then "git") was there > when I came here. > > It could change but that's another discussion that > will probably never happen as people just assume > that everyone should use GitHub on its own (as > contrasted to through being an Apache committer). > [The latter is the main thing I don't agree with.] > > > I would just call it a current policy or practice. > > > > > > > >> > That's a very debatable point of view. > >> > >> There was no debate. > > > > > > Yet it is a debatable point of view :) > > > > No problem with automating the release process. > [Cf. my comments in other threads on that subject.] > > > > >> I don't see why you are putting those sideways > >> conclusions into the simple issue of maintaining > >> this place comfortable for everyone, not only > >> for GitHub users. > >> > > > > And I don't get why you are making such a big deal about having to delete > > 100(?) emails and maybe setting up an email filter. > > Yesterday 0 > Today 100 > Tomorrow ? > > And for what? Delete. > I don't get the logic. > > >> Deleting the messages should have been 10s max. > >> > I wonder why you choose to be outraged instead. > >> > >> No, today's flood just pushed me to want to have > >> something that's bothering for months, fixed. > >> > > > > The flood was from enabling the bot. > > So what has bothered you before? > > The mails about PRs? > > Yes, all those messages that would go in [TRACE] level > in a logger. > > >> I guess there are many people out there that like it as a tool. > >> > >> Maybe you could explain why it's a burden for you? > >> > >> Sure: No GH account. > >> > > > > OK - why don't you have one? > > Why should I? > Do I need one to contribute here? I so, where is stated? > > > And why does that make things harder? > > It does when changes to the contribution work flow > assumes that everyone has one. > [I mentioned that 2 or 3 times already on "dev@". > Namely that it is factually as if "dev@" and JIRA are > not anymore *the* (only) official places where changes > to the codes are discussed.] > > >> so maybe elaborate on > >> > the inconvenience. > >> > >> Try to do something on GH without being logged in. > >> > > > > So others are using a tool that (I assume) you don't want to use, > > and that is causing inconvenience for you and that is bothering you? > > The inconvenience is the invalid assumption that everyone > should use GH even though that was never discussed. > > > And you want the rest of us to not use the tool because of that? > > Where did you get that conclusion from? > > Is GH more than a convenience tool like Travis, Coveralls or > SonarQube? > Or is it a core part of the work flow like "git"? > If so, when did this happen? Where is the decision recorded? > > Gilles > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > > -- Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com>
