Skip to content

[JENKINS-33090] Ease bundles management by the administrator #737

Open
3 of 5 issues completed
Open

Description

@jenkins-infra-bot

The Support core plugins automatically creates a bundle when the instance starts and after every hour.
These bundles are directly stored under JENKINS_HOME/support but the user have to access to the Jenkins server FS to manage them.
We would like to add the following features :

  • List bundles stored on the instance (name + creation date + size)
  • Allow to download each bundle
  • Allow to delete each bundle or all bundles
  • Allow to browse the content of each bundle

Originally reported by aheritier, imported from: Ease bundles management by the administrator
  • assignee: allan_burdajewicz
  • status: Open
  • priority: Minor
  • component(s): support-core-plugin
  • label(s): gsoc, gsoc-2016
  • resolution: Unresolved
  • votes: 2
  • watchers: 7
  • imported: 20251212-090250
Raw content of original issue

The Support core plugins automatically creates a bundle when the instance starts and after every hour. These bundles are directly stored under JENKINS_HOME/support but the user have to access to the Jenkins server FS to manage them. We would like to add the following features :

  • List bundles stored on the instance (name + creation date + size)
  • Allow to download each bundle
  • Allow to delete each bundle or all bundles
  • Allow to browse the content of each bundle

Activity

  1. jenkins-infra-bot commented on May 17, 2016

    @jenkins-infra-bot
    Author
    ifernandezcalvo:
    • Original comment link
    • Raw content of original comment:

      Also it will very interesting the ability to automatically delete all support bundles older than X days.

    Also it will very interesting the ability to automatically delete all support bundles older than X days.

  2. jenkins-infra-bot commented on May 18, 2016

    @jenkins-infra-bot
    Author
    aheritier:
    • Original comment link
    • Raw content of original comment:

      yes good idea. If we have enough time we'll see if we can propose it

    yes good idea. If we have enough time we'll see if we can propose it

  3. jenkins-infra-bot commented on May 18, 2016

    @jenkins-infra-bot
    Author
    minudika:
    • Original comment link
    • Raw content of original comment:

      +1 I hope there will be enough time for this implementation. If not, we can add this feature after the gsoc period.

    +1
    I hope there will be enough time for this implementation. If not, we can add this feature after the gsoc period.

  4. jenkins-infra-bot commented on May 18, 2016

    @jenkins-infra-bot
    Author
    aheritier:
    • Original comment link
    • Raw content of original comment:

      yes sure minudika I need to check with rtyler if we can activate sub-tasks in Jira (he told me why they weren't but I don't remember - crappy brain). If we have subtasks we can easily split the work of such big tasks into subtasks with few optional ones and if we don't process them we'll just convert them as new tasks for a future fix

    yes sure minudika
    I need to check with rtyler if we can activate sub-tasks in Jira (he told me why they weren't but I don't remember - crappy brain).
    If we have subtasks we can easily split the work of such big tasks into subtasks with few optional ones and if we don't process them we'll just convert them as new tasks for a future fix

  5. jenkins-infra-bot commented on May 18, 2016

    @jenkins-infra-bot
    Author
    rtyler:
    • Original comment link
    • Raw content of original comment:

      aheritier we do have Epics in JIRA, which I personally fine more useful than tasks/sub-tasks since JIRA workflows usually don't play nicely with sub-tasks in my experience.

      They're enable-able, but if this can be accomplished with Epics and Issues then that would be preferred since it's already present.

    aheritier we do have Epics in JIRA, which I personally fine more useful than tasks/sub-tasks since JIRA workflows usually don't play nicely with sub-tasks in my experience.

    They're enable-able, but if this can be accomplished with Epics and Issues then that would be preferred since it's already present.

  6. jenkins-infra-bot commented on May 18, 2016

    @jenkins-infra-bot
    Author
    aheritier:
    • Original comment link
    • Raw content of original comment:

      ok I didn't remember that we had agile epics here thus it's good. I can convert this one to Epic and create others tasks to attach to the epic. I'll do this later. It's perfect

    ok I didn't remember that we had agile epics here thus it's good. I can convert this one to Epic and create others tasks to attach to the epic.
    I'll do this later. It's perfect

  7. jenkins-infra-bot commented on Jun 23, 2016

    @jenkins-infra-bot
    Author
    jglick:
    • Original comment link
    • Raw content of original comment:

      A Story plus Tasks would be more appropriate for this sort of thing.

    A Story plus Tasks would be more appropriate for this sort of thing.

  8. jenkins-infra-bot commented on Jun 23, 2016

    @jenkins-infra-bot
    Author
    aheritier:
    • Original comment link
    • Raw content of original comment:

      jglick sub-tasks aren't activated on this instance. That's why I used Epic + Tasks..

    jglick sub-tasks aren't activated on this instance. That's why I used Epic + Tasks..

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Type

    Projects

    No projects

      Milestone

      No milestone

      Relationships

      None yet

      Development

      No branches or pull requests

      Issue actions