-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 9k
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-53511] Improve discovery and readability of WebClient #3618
[JENKINS-53511] Improve discovery and readability of WebClient #3618
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This cleans things up nicely.
@Wadeck are you still interested in it? There are merge conflicts, and there will be more if it is not merged soon |
cc1a05e
to
d97361b
Compare
For the information, the upgrade from
|
It has broken even more. I tried updating from 2.41 to 2.42 in #3661 , but finally I gave up and released 2.41.1 |
Seems I have only discovered the top of the iceberg :p will try to correct them... Other breakages:
=> "only" 64 tests failures (= 16 as we have 4 different env).
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Nice cleanup!
test-pom/pom.xml
Outdated
@@ -54,7 +54,9 @@ THE SOFTWARE. | |||
<dependency> | |||
<groupId>${project.groupId}</groupId> | |||
<artifactId>jenkins-test-harness</artifactId> | |||
<version>2.41.1</version> | |||
<!-- <version>2.41.1</version>--> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Are these versions commented on purpose?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I am still correcting the tests, so it's WiP (label added)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Ho actually I thought I pushed the 2.46 after the failing try with 2.42. Thx for the heads up!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think this bump should actually be reverted in not required for the scope of that PR. This seems like something that can (and if can, then should) be handled in a dedicated PR for clarity (and more speedy reviews because less code, good for everyone).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This has been marked as ready for merge but the code is still commented. Shouldn't we just remove it?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
<!-- <version>2.41.1</version>--> |
Next step, try using system property to enforce the |
in 72bafd9
Why is this actually the target? |
0e643c0
to
297104a
Compare
As discussed with Baptiste, this PR will only focus on inclusion of the JTH version that provide the initial desired methods, not all the change with the space issue. So putting the JTH to 2.42 only. Due to this update, I was forced to bump as well the |
Sounds like a legitimate bug, or what am I missing? |
The constructor transforms the File into URI but that's the good behavior at this point. I thought it was the root cause but actually it's the interpretation of this URI that is badly done. That bad interpretation is only present in the Xalan version included in the JTH. I tested JTH-2.42 with / without space, same behavior. Using The JTH:2.46 has trouble with space but not without. And if I run the Conclusion, it's only a problem in test and so, not a "production" bug. Thanks @thomasgl-orange for the so simple PR that solves my annoying issue! |
Sure, sounds good, once this one gets merged I will update mine. |
I revoked the previous approval as I made changes since their creation |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It still looks good to me!
Seems we are good with this one, I will request a merge later today if nobody complains! |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
two comments to remove on test/pom.xml
and it's good.
test-pom/pom.xml
Outdated
@@ -54,7 +54,9 @@ THE SOFTWARE. | |||
<dependency> | |||
<groupId>${project.groupId}</groupId> | |||
<artifactId>jenkins-test-harness</artifactId> | |||
<version>2.41.1</version> | |||
<!-- <version>2.41.1</version>--> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
<!-- <version>2.41.1</version>--> |
test-pom/pom.xml
Outdated
<version>2.41.1</version> | ||
<!-- <version>2.41.1</version>--> | ||
<version>2.42</version> | ||
<!-- <version>2.46</version>--> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
<!-- <version>2.46</version>--> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I don't understand why Github showed me outdated content in the review..
Seems that Isa got the same issue |
- And thus, adapt the code due to the breaking changes in JTH sub-lib
297104a
to
73c6974
Compare
Squash of the commits to separate clearly what was required for the JTH bump (due to breaking change in HTMLUnit new version) and what's for the discovery of the new features. |
All good! 👍 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks @Wadeck ! Will merge once the tests pass.
i doubt this is related, but...
|
I strongly suspect Oleg was planning to close/reopen to retrigger the build. |
@batmat Definitely. Sorry for forgetting about the second step :( |
No problem at all Oleg. It's happened to me many times :) |
And now it's passing, thx @batmat / @oleg-nenashev |
That's why I do poke commits instead of close/reopen :( |
Will merge it once the build passes |
See JENKINS-53511.
Proposed changelog entries
Submitter checklist
* Use the
Internal:
prefix if the change has no user-visible impact (API, test frameworks, etc.)