Updated developers list and enabled CD | plugin-simplify-qa-connector

[Simplify3x]

Link to GitHub repository

https://github.com/jenkinsci/simplify-qa-connector-plugin

When modifying release permission

If you are modifying the release permission of your plugin or component, fill out the following checklist:

Release permission checklist (for submitters)

Beta Give feedback

1. The usernames of the users added to the "developers" section in the .yml file are the same the users use to log in to accounts.jenkins.io.
2. All users added have logged in to Artifactory and Jira once.
3. I have mentioned an existing team member of the plugin or component team to approve this request.

When enabling automated releases (cd: true)

Follow the documentation to ensure, your pull request is set up properly. Don't merge it yet.
In case of changes requested by the hosting team, an open PR facilitates future reviews, without derailing work across multiple PRs.

Link to the PR enabling CD in your plugin

jenkinsci/simplify-qa-connector-plugin#9

CD checklist (for submitters)

Beta Give feedback

1. I have provided a link to the pull request in my plugin, which enables CD according to the documentation.

Reviewer checklist

Beta Give feedback

1. Check that the $pluginId Developers team has Admin permissions while granting the access.
2. In the case of plugin adoption, ensure that the Jenkins Jira default assignee is either removed or changed to the new maintainer.
3. If security contacts are changed (this includes add/remove), ping the security officer (currently @Wadeck) in this pull request. If an email contact is changed, wait for approval from the security officer.

There are IRC Bot commands for it.

[NotMyFault]

The link should be the link to your plugin's PR, not the RPU PR.

[Simplify3x]

@NotMyFault can you provide some clarification or maybe a link, as to which two branches need to be merged in the Plugin's PR?

[NotMyFault]

NotMyFault can you provide some clarification or maybe a link, as to which two branches need to be merged in the Plugin's PR?

Which part is unclear? You prepare the changes outlined in the documentation, raise a PR including all plugin modifications towards your plugin, and we review these changes made. If everything is right, this PR will be merged.

[Simplify3x]

The changes outlined in the documentation are already a part of the latest commit in the master branch of the repository.
There is no requirement to raise a PR.
You are good to review the code changes.

[NotMyFault]

The changes outlined in the documentation are already a part of the latest commit in the master branch of the repository.
There is no requirement to raise a PR.

That exactly is the requirement, allowing us to review them before integrating into the default branch. Because, as in your case, the changes made are incomplete and cannot be reviewed in a PR-like manner.

If you read over the documentation and see the examples PRs, for example the JUnit one. Please create a new PR towards your plugin with all these changes allowing us to review them, as recommended.

[Simplify3x]

Hi @NotMyFault,
We have made the changes and created a new PR as per mentioned in the documentation.
Kindly review the changes and provide your valuable feedback.

[NotMyFault]

Looks good so far, please rebase your PR with the latest changes on the default branch.

[Simplify3x]

Rebase Done

[NotMyFault]

Rebase Done

This PR has not been rebased.

[Simplify3x]

We could not find the update with rebase option so we merged it instead.
Trying to revert and re-create a new PR.

[Simplify3x]

Can we get some update on this?

[alecharp]

@Simplify3x please, on your local clone of this repository (repository-permissions-updater) the following commands:

git pull -a
git rebase upstream/master

if the remote towards https://github.com/jenkins-infra/repository-permissions-updater.git is not called upstream on your local clone, please adapt the command accordingly.

[Simplify3x]

@Simplify3x please, on your local clone of this repository (repository-permissions-updater) the following commands:

git pull -a
git rebase upstream/master

if the remote towards https://github.com/jenkins-infra/repository-permissions-updater.git is not called upstream on your local clone, please adapt the command accordingly.

All the desired changes have been already pushed onto this fork (remote) towards https://github.com/jenkins-infra/repository-permissions-updater.git

Now, to rebase and merge these changes to the master branch of RPU, it is only possible by you or your team.
We do not have push access to the master branch of RPU

[alecharp]

@Simplify3x when you open a pull request against a repository (jenkins-infra/repository-permissions-updater), you link a branch from your fork and the pull request. Anything that you push to the branch will be seen in the pull request. So, when you merged the commits from jenkins-infra:master into your master branch, and push that commit into your fork, it's showed here (e0a0408).

Now, to rebase and merge these changes to the master branch of RPU, it is only possible by you or your team.
We do not have push access to the master branch of RPU

You don't need write access on the jenkins-infra repository to do that. That's why we asked you do to the rebase.

[alecharp]

I'm not sure this is something you want to include in your pull request.

[Simplify3x]

We want to include that.

[NotMyFault]

We want to include that.

The response lacks a sufficient justification of what the path is supposed to represent in terms of enabling CD.

[Simplify3x]

What kind of justification do you require?
What is your acceptance criteria?

[NotMyFault]

What kind of justification do you require?

The change proposed lacks a rationale reasoning why you want to modify your release paths, when the PR description and title claim to enable CD only.

Additionally, the repository isn't set up to support project inheritance (i.e., no reactor, no module aggregation, etc.). This leads to the fact that you can't release multiple artifacts under multiple artifact IDs, even if you want to do that.
It's worth mentioning that this is a complex procedure, you commonly don't answer with "We want to include that.", and therefore I agree with alecharp that you should remove this from the PR.