-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 110
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-67978] Fix for job parameters on built-in node #232
Conversation
I am not really maintaining this plugin anymore, so feel free to take over: https://www.jenkins.io/doc/developer/plugin-governance/adopt-a-plugin/ |
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 for the PR!
Hello @basil! Is it possible to set the required Jenkins version to 2.477 instead of 2.479? |
The next LTS release will be 2.479.1 which is scheduled for release on October 30 (in two weeks). |
Thanks for prompt reply @basil :-) But will it really be 2.479? And it says that it will be 2.477.1 |
The calendar is just out of date. @MarkEWaite (in his role as release lead) can update it I think. |
Thanks for reporting that @nvsmirnov and thanks for the mention @basil . I've updated the Jenkins calendar to show the correct LTS baseline version is 2.479, not 2.477. |
Ok, thanks a lot guys! :-) |
@nvsmirnov Is this working well in production? |
@basil yes, I checked it in my environment, it works, thank you! |
This PR fixes problem when option "Prevent multiple jobs with identical parameters from running concurrently" is not working (at least one issue is open: JENKINS-67978), and I've seen some similar question on the Internet.
Testing done
I tested this change manually in my environment. Before applying this patch, parameters were ignored, same job with equal parameters was triggered, didn't wait for the previous job with the same parameter to finish.
After applying the patch, job with the same paparameters is waiting for an existing job with the same parameters to finish - exactly as it shoud..
I am not a programmer, so I'm not able to implement automated tests. I was able to add some debugging and to guess what may fix the problem, but this is already too good for me :-)
Note there are few other places where getExecutors() is used in this plugin, may be someone need to consider change that paces too, or may be not, I'm not sure. I suggest to approve this PR first because it fixes the problem that really needed by some users, and then decide if other places needs to be changed similarly.
P.S. There is some kind of explanation on my findings in my first comment to JENKINS-67978
Submitter checklist
Closes #269