Describe how to manually manage parts of the version number #4933

daniel-beck · 2022-02-18T12:00:40Z

Many developers are surprised about the big version numbers, so

Make that more explicit
Offer an alternative

Because alternatives don't fit great into the current list format, I switched that to separate sections.

jglick · 2022-02-18T16:42:49Z

alternatives don't fit great into the current list format

Nested bullets? 3a vs. 3b? Not sure.

jglick · 2022-02-18T16:50:19Z

content/doc/developer/publishing/releasing-cd.adoc

+   <properties>
+-    <revision>1.2.3</revision>
+-    <changelist>-SNAPSHOT</changelist>
+    <revision>1.2</revision>


I do not think we should recommend this. It just does not play well with the concept of automated release.

It is fine to document using versions like 2.$generated (where the plugin was previously on 1.x) just so that you can change your mind and go back to MRP with 3.0 but if all goes well never touch the 2. part again (or ultimately drop it). But we should not advertise use of semantic versioning, which JEP-229 does not really support with a reasonable UX.

(You can use Conventional Commits to generate version numbers for you. But this will mean that the version number is not deterministically implied by the commit. That means that any tools which expect to check out the /scm/tag and locally build the same version, like PCT, will get confused. This is a reasonable thing to do for a service, but problematic for something like a Jenkins plugin which might be a Maven dependency of something else.)

I feel like I your concerns are addressed by lines 147 ("or you simply prefer") and 174-175? Or is this just about the "semantic versioning" choice of term?

IMO

jenkins.io/content/doc/developer/publishing/releasing-cd.adoc

Line 147 in fd68826

For a component whose version number should reflect some semantic versioning, or you simply prefer to have more classic major version numbers (like Jenkins core), keep `<revision>` in the `<properties>` section, setting it to the prefix (`major`, `major.minor`, etc., depending on how much of the version number you want to manually manage) and use it as part of the top-level `<version>` element:

does not capture what I consider the legitimate use case—wishing to keep major numbers small enough so as to defer a binding decision about JEP-229; and

jenkins.io/content/doc/developer/publishing/releasing-cd.adoc

Line 175 in fd68826

Ideally you always change the `revision` as part of the changes that semantically would require a `revision` change for the next release to prevent accidental automatic releases that do not use a new `revision`.

is advertising something that would in practice be too painful to seriously adopt, and which would largely negate the “CD” aspect of JEP-229.

If people want to keep the MRP model, and simply do not want to have local credentials, then jenkins-infra/jenkins-maven-cd-action#14 would make more sense.

(BTW prefer using one source code line per sentence or major clause, for easier editing, reviewing, and linking.)

jglick

I am afraid I find the diff here pretty much unreviewable due to all the structure changes. (Same when ignoring whitespace, or viewing rich diff.)

content/doc/developer/publishing/releasing-cd.adoc

jglick · 2022-02-22T22:20:47Z

content/doc/developer/publishing/releasing-cd.adoc

-+
-NOTE: It is worth communicating this to your users, as they will see a very different version number format than before.
-The best way to do this is to add a line to the release notes: link:https://github.com/jenkinsci/azure-artifact-manager-plugin/releases/tag/86.va2aa4b1038c7[example note].
+Here the version numbers will look like `1.321.vabcdef456789` or `1.999999-SNAPSHOT`, respectively, which are more similar to version numbers used by Jenkins itself.


Do you mean

Suggested change

Here the version numbers will look like `1.321.vabcdef456789` or `1.999999-SNAPSHOT`, respectively, which are more similar to version numbers used by Jenkins itself.

Here the version numbers will look like `1.321.vabcdef456789` or `1.999999-SNAPSHOT`, respectively, which are more similar to version numbers used by Jenkins core.

?

content/doc/developer/publishing/releasing-cd.adoc

daniel-beck · 2022-02-23T08:41:05Z

I am afraid I find the diff here pretty much unreviewable due to all the structure changes

We have preview deployments if you want to take a look at the live site, maybe that helps? https://deploy-preview-4933--jenkins-io-site-pr.netlify.app/doc/developer/publishing/releasing-cd/

Co-Authored-By: Jesse Glick <jglick@cloudbees.com>

jglick · 2022-02-23T14:40:47Z

We have preview deployments if you want to take a look at the live site

Overkill, it is easy to view the full page in AsciiDoc preview in GH. Just hard to see the diff.

jglick

Looks better. I would still recommend explicitly discussing the reasoning behind Manually controlled prefix.

If you do not want to have (major) version numbers increase quickly

and

more similar to version numbers used by Jenkins itself

do not really capture the (out of band) discussion, which was about people being leery of committing up front to having major version numbers be in the triple digits, with no option of going back to MRP-style versioning except by starting at say 1000.1, because version numbers going forward must be mathematically larger than any currently on the UC.

kuisathaverat · 2022-03-04T09:18:50Z

content/doc/developer/publishing/releasing-cd.adoc

+--- a/.mvn/maven.config
+++ b/.mvn/maven.config
+@@ -1,2 +1,3 @@
+ -Pconsume-incrementals
+ -Pmight-produce-incrementals
+-Dchangelist.format=%d.v%s
+--- a/pom.xml
+++ b/pom.xml
+@@ -10,12 +10,12 @@
+   <artifactId>some-library-wrapper</artifactId>
+-  <version>${revision}${changelist}</version>
+  <version>${revision}.${changelist}</version>
+   <packaging>hpi</packaging>
+   <properties>
+-    <revision>1.2.3</revision>
+-    <changelist>-SNAPSHOT</changelist>
+    <revision>1</revision>
+    <changelist>999999-SNAPSHOT</changelist>
+     <jenkins.version>2.176.4</jenkins.version>
 ----


Why not directly a suggestion? I do not see the point of a diff, it could not match with the plugin's config. It is more clear and straigforward.

.mvn/maven.config

-Pconsume-incrementals -Pmight-produce-incrementals -Dchangelist.format=%d.v%s

pom.xml

<artifactId>some-library-wrapper</artifactId> <version>${revision}.${changelist}</version>  ... <properties> <revision>1</revision>  <changelist>999999-SNAPSHOT</changelist>  ...

Carelessly applied, that changes both your artifact ID and Jenkins baseline.

In particular, the diff seems useful e.g. with maven.config so people don't remove other, unrelated content they have in here.

well, I give some credit to the Jenkins plugin maintainer to understanding the pom.xml and the maven.config files

Explain how we have these CD-"enabled" plugins then, where maintainers evidently failed to follow these instructions:

console-column-plugin:2.0.1-rc59.8fe210d5e9b_3 jobConfigHistory:2.31-rc1107.2354f08725a_8 leanix-microservice-intelligence:1.0.11-rc201.335c08161b66 minio:1.3.3-rc93.9e92f846d4cf purge-build-queue-plugin:2.0.0-rc11.9c20b_30c9572 remoting-opentelemetry:1.0-rc89.d67d14d05962 skip-cron-rebuild:1.1-rc20.50497e5a8a3a talend:1.4-rc43.dbb2c0671f67

In my experience, many plugin maintainers only have very basic understanding of Maven, some don't even know Java well (according to themselves).

jglick · 2022-03-04T18:20:39Z

Conflicts with #4961. Need to move this forward. Shall I offer a smaller patch which does not reformat the whole file?

daniel-beck · 2022-03-04T18:38:19Z

Just needs someone to actually approve this 🤷

jglick · 2022-03-04T18:44:45Z

#4933 (review) still, but better than status quo.

jglick · 2022-03-04T19:41:57Z

Another merge conflict with #4963. 🤷

daniel-beck · 2022-03-04T20:01:31Z

That could as well have been a suggested change here…

Describe how to manually manage parts of the version number

596116b

daniel-beck requested a review from jglick February 18, 2022 12:00

daniel-beck requested a review from a team as a code owner February 18, 2022 12:00

probot-autolabeler bot added the documentation Jenkins documentation, including user and developer docs, solution pages, etc. label Feb 18, 2022

Apply passthrough to fix Asciidoc warning

fd68826

infra-ci-jenkins-io bot deployed to preview February 18, 2022 13:35 View deployment

jglick suggested changes Feb 18, 2022

View reviewed changes

Address review feedback

0aa5bd7

daniel-beck requested a review from jglick February 22, 2022 21:55

infra-ci-jenkins-io bot deployed to preview February 22, 2022 22:02 View deployment

jglick reviewed Feb 22, 2022

View reviewed changes

Address review feedback

dbcd887

Co-Authored-By: Jesse Glick <jglick@cloudbees.com>

infra-ci-jenkins-io bot deployed to preview February 23, 2022 10:17 View deployment

jglick approved these changes Feb 23, 2022

View reviewed changes

jglick mentioned this pull request Mar 3, 2022

feat: enable continuous delivery jenkinsci/ssh-agents-plugin#269

Merged

kuisathaverat reviewed Mar 4, 2022

View reviewed changes

kuisathaverat mentioned this pull request Mar 4, 2022

chore: change the version number format jenkinsci/ssh-agents-plugin#278

Merged

Merge branch 'master' into jep-229-versions

607eb6f

daniel-beck mentioned this pull request Mar 4, 2022

Clarify release drafter configuration changes #4961

Merged

infra-ci-jenkins-io bot deployed to preview March 4, 2022 18:35 View deployment

Merge branch 'master' into jep-229-versions

cf12257

infra-ci-jenkins-io bot deployed to preview March 4, 2022 20:11 View deployment

timja approved these changes Mar 4, 2022

View reviewed changes

timja merged commit 91a7d6c into jenkins-infra:master Mar 4, 2022

jglick mentioned this pull request Aug 8, 2022

Describing hpi.compatibleSinceVersion in CD-enabled plugins #5349

Merged

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Describe how to manually manage parts of the version number #4933

Describe how to manually manage parts of the version number #4933

daniel-beck commented Feb 18, 2022

jglick commented Feb 18, 2022

jglick Feb 18, 2022

daniel-beck Feb 19, 2022

jglick Feb 21, 2022

jglick left a comment

jglick Feb 22, 2022

daniel-beck commented Feb 23, 2022

jglick commented Feb 23, 2022

jglick left a comment

kuisathaverat Mar 4, 2022 •

edited

Loading

daniel-beck Mar 4, 2022 •

edited

Loading

kuisathaverat Mar 4, 2022

daniel-beck Mar 4, 2022 •

edited

Loading

jglick commented Mar 4, 2022

daniel-beck commented Mar 4, 2022

jglick commented Mar 4, 2022

jglick commented Mar 4, 2022

daniel-beck commented Mar 4, 2022

	Here the version numbers will look like `1.321.vabcdef456789` or `1.999999-SNAPSHOT`, respectively, which are more similar to version numbers used by Jenkins itself.
	Here the version numbers will look like `1.321.vabcdef456789` or `1.999999-SNAPSHOT`, respectively, which are more similar to version numbers used by Jenkins core.

Describe how to manually manage parts of the version number #4933

Describe how to manually manage parts of the version number #4933

Conversation

daniel-beck commented Feb 18, 2022

jglick commented Feb 18, 2022

jglick Feb 18, 2022

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

daniel-beck Feb 19, 2022

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

jglick Feb 21, 2022

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

jglick left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

jglick Feb 22, 2022

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

daniel-beck commented Feb 23, 2022

jglick commented Feb 23, 2022

jglick left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

kuisathaverat Mar 4, 2022 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

daniel-beck Mar 4, 2022 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

kuisathaverat Mar 4, 2022

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

daniel-beck Mar 4, 2022 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

jglick commented Mar 4, 2022

daniel-beck commented Mar 4, 2022

jglick commented Mar 4, 2022

jglick commented Mar 4, 2022

daniel-beck commented Mar 4, 2022

kuisathaverat Mar 4, 2022 •

edited

Loading

daniel-beck Mar 4, 2022 •

edited

Loading

daniel-beck Mar 4, 2022 •

edited

Loading