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鈥檒l occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Replace pipeline-stage-view with graph-view in the setup wizard #8884

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Mar 3, 2024

Conversation

NotMyFault
Copy link
Member

@NotMyFault NotMyFault commented Jan 21, 2024

The change proposed replaces the pipeline-stage-view plugin with the pipeline-graph-view plugin in the setup wizard.
Given the pipeline-stage-view is closely tied to BO - which was removed from the setup wizard some time ago - I'd like to suggest replacing it with the graph-view plugin, providing a more modern overview of your pipelines.

It's worth mentioning that the graph-view plugin is under active development and not feature-stalled like the stage view one (thanks to @timja 馃挴 )

Testing done

The plugin is installed as intended, when setting up a new instance.

Proposed changelog entries

  • JENKINS-XXXXX, human-readable text

Proposed upgrade guidelines

N/A

Submitter checklist

Edit tasklist title
Beta Give feedback Tasklist Submitter checklist, more options

Delete tasklist

Delete tasklist block?
Are you sure? All relationships in this tasklist will be removed.
  1. The Jira issue, if it exists, is well-described.
    Options
  2. The changelog entries and upgrade guidelines are appropriate for the audience affected by the change (users or developers, depending on the change) and are in the imperative mood (see examples). Fill in the Proposed upgrade guidelines section only if there are breaking changes or changes that may require extra steps from users during upgrade.
    Options
  3. There is automated testing or an explanation as to why this change has no tests.
    Options
  4. New public classes, fields, and methods are annotated with @Restricted or have @since TODO Javadocs, as appropriate.
    Options
  5. New deprecations are annotated with @Deprecated(since = "TODO") or @Deprecated(forRemoval = true, since = "TODO"), if applicable.
    Options
  6. New or substantially changed JavaScript is not defined inline and does not call eval to ease future introduction of Content Security Policy (CSP) directives (see documentation).
    Options
  7. For dependency updates, there are links to external changelogs and, if possible, full differentials.
    Options
  8. For new APIs and extension points, there is a link to at least one consumer.
    Options

Desired reviewers

@mention

Before the changes are marked as ready-for-merge:

Maintainer checklist

Edit tasklist title
Beta Give feedback Tasklist Maintainer checklist, more options

Delete tasklist

Delete tasklist block?
Are you sure? All relationships in this tasklist will be removed.
  1. There are at least two (2) approvals for the pull request and no outstanding requests for change.
    Options
  2. Conversations in the pull request are over, or it is explicit that a reviewer is not blocking the change.
    Options
  3. Changelog entries in the pull request title and/or Proposed changelog entries are accurate, human-readable, and in the imperative mood.
    Options
  4. Proper changelog labels are set so that the changelog can be generated automatically.
    Options
  5. If the change needs additional upgrade steps from users, the upgrade-guide-needed label is set and there is a Proposed upgrade guidelines section in the pull request title (see example).
    Options
  6. If it would make sense to backport the change to LTS, a Jira issue must exist, be a Bug or Improvement, and be labeled as lts-candidate to be considered (see query).
    Options

Signed-off-by: Alexander Brandes <mc.cache@web.de>
@NotMyFault NotMyFault added the skip-changelog Should not be shown in the changelog label Jan 21, 2024
@NotMyFault NotMyFault requested a review from a team January 21, 2024 13:40
@daniel-beck
Copy link
Member

daniel-beck commented Jan 21, 2024

pipeline-stage-view is closely tied to BO

How so? AFAICT they're completely unrelated implementations, all they have in common is use stages (pipeline-stage-step) to organize content. From that perspective, Graph View is just as tied to BO.

@NotMyFault
Copy link
Member Author

pipeline-stage-view is closely tied to BO

How so? AFAICT they're completely unrelated implementations, all they have in common is use stages (pipeline-stage-step) to organize content. From that perspective, Graph View is just as tied to BO.

Oh, I was believing that stage-view was the BO attempt to view pipelines, not that it's a dependency of BO.
But I would like to replace it still, given the stage view provides a more modern UI integrating with modern Jenkins, layout and UX wise. The feature-stallness of stage-view is another point I'd like to see it replaced.

@mawinter69
Copy link
Contributor

In your initial description you have 2 places where you wrote stage-view but meant graph-view I think.

I'd like to suggest replacing it with the graph-view plugin, providing a more modern overview over your pipelines.
It's worth mentioning that the graph-view plugin is under active development and not feature-stalled like the stage view one

@NotMyFault
Copy link
Member Author

In your initial description you have 2 places where you wrote stage-view but meant graph-view I think.

I'd like to suggest replacing it with the graph-view plugin, providing a more modern overview over your pipelines.
It's worth mentioning that the graph-view plugin is under active development and not feature-stalled like the stage view one

Oh absolutely 馃う
Thanks for finding, I'll fix it right away.

@NotMyFault NotMyFault merged commit 02c99cb into jenkinsci:master Mar 3, 2024
16 checks passed
@NotMyFault NotMyFault deleted the stage-to-graph branch March 3, 2024 09:34
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
skip-changelog Should not be shown in the changelog
Projects
None yet
5 participants