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

[JENKINS-17680] Show warnings when upgraded from Copy Artifact < 1.26. #21

wants to merge 3 commits into from


Copy link

commented Jun 15, 2013

When updated from Copy Artifact < 1.26, "Project name" filed gets empty in project configuration pages.
This breaks existing projects using Copy Artifact.

This patch does followings:

  • Fills "Project name" with a value configured in old version.
  • Prompt a message if filled "Project name" contains "/", that is, it may have to be split into "Parameter filtetrs".

See attached image for a warning message sample:


This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Jun 15, 2013

Jenkins » copyartifact-plugin #44 SUCCESS
This pull request looks good
(what's this?)


This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Jul 17, 2013

Thank you for a pull request! Please check this document for how the Jenkins project handles pull requests


This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Jul 18, 2013

This is probably the wrong fix though I am not sure exactly what is right. The problem is that old versions of Copy Artifact used a projectName field that mixed two unrelated things: an Item.fullName, and a filter for build selection. To implement a crucial security fix it was necessary to separate them.

Old builder configurations are automatically upgraded when you first do a build. This is done during a build, not during XStream deserialization, since the latter lacks enough context to reliably interpret the old storage format: you in general need to know the containing folder (ItemGroup) to interpret relative paths.

It would be useful to upgrade old storage as a one-off @Init task, after jobs have been loaded and we have access to the full context (setting a plugin-wide flag indicating this has been done and does not need to be repeated).

@jglick jglick closed this Jul 18, 2013
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
None yet
4 participants
You can’t perform that action at this time.