uplifted ci pipeline changes

[mihaiplesa]

For #8979

Submitter Checklist:

• Submitted a ticket for my issue if one did not already exist.
• Used Github auto-closing keywords in the commit message.
• Added/updated tests for this change (for new code or code which already has tests).
• Verified that these changes build without errors on
  • Android
  • iOS
  • Linux
  • macOS
  • Windows
• Verified that these changes pass automated tests (unit, browser, security tests) on
  • iOS
  • Linux
  • macOS
  • Windows
• Ran git rebase master (if needed).
• Ran git rebase -i to squash commits (if needed).
• Tagged reviewers and labelled the pull request as needed.
• Requested a security/privacy review as needed.
• If adding a new directory with NPM packages, ensure this directory is
  added to scripts/audit.js.
• Public documentation has been updated as necessary. For instance:
  • https://github.com/brave/brave-browser/wiki/Deviations-from-Chromium-(features-we-disable-or-remove)
  • https://github.com/brave/brave-browser/wiki/Proxy-redirected-URLs
  • https://github.com/brave/brave-browser/wiki/Fingerprinting-Protection-Mode
  • https://github.com/brave/brave-browser/wiki/Brave%E2%80%99s-Use-of-Referral-Codes
  • https://github.com/brave/brave-browser/wiki/Custom-Headers
  • https://github.com/brave/brave-browser/wiki/Web-compatibility-issues-with-tracking-protection

Test Plan:

Reviewer Checklist:

• New files have MPL-2.0 license header.
• Request a security/privacy review as needed.
• Adequate test coverage exists to prevent regressions.

After-merge Checklist:

• The associated issue milestone is set to the smallest version that the
  changes has landed on.
• All relevant documentation has been updated.

[kjozwiak]

Uplift into 1.7.x approved after deliberating with @brave/uplift-approvers. Please make sure that all the correct labels are being used and the associated issue is moved into the correct milestone.

[bridiver]

I don't think we should be doing stuff like this. If this is necessary then there is another problem that needs to be addressed.

[mihaiplesa]

is it ok to just take it out? or have to do git clean -fxd instead?

[bridiver]

I don't think anything should be needed there, why was it added originally?

…

On Apr 14, 2020, at 4:21 AM, Mihai PLESA ***@***.***> wrote:  @mihaiplesa commented on this pull request. In Jenkinsfile: > @@ -97,10 +94,12 @@ pipeline { expression { return !fileExists("src/brave/package.json") || !SKIP_INIT } } steps { - sh """ - rm -rf src/brave - npm run init -- --target_os=android - """ + timeout(time: 1, unit: "HOURS") { + sh """ + rm -rf src/brave is it ok to just take it out? or have to do git clean -fxd instead? — You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe.