[Jenkins-infra] Moving ci.jenkins.io to Java 11

R. Tyler Croy rtyler at brokenco.de
Wed Apr 3 15:20:45 UTC 2019


(replies inline)

On Wed, 03 Apr 2019, Baptiste Mathus wrote:

> +1.
> 
> Given the GA was announced a few days ago [1], and [1]ci.jenkins.io is running
> on 2.164.1, I am strongly in favor of doing this.
> We do not expect any issue by this bump, and if any, we should rather hit them
> before our users.
> 
> This email is more to gather feedback about how people feel about this. 
> 
> If people generally agree, then we will move forward to discuss what needs to
> be done to assess that upgrade before actually doing it.
> (For example: the very minimum/first step would be to install an instance with
> the same set of plugins as in [2]ci.jenkins.io, etc. + manually checking the
> installed plugins to judge if we see any risk).


I'm also in favor of upgrading, but I shall note that ci.jenkins.io is a
production system and purposefully runs LTS and only LTS.

I've not been following the LTS train closely enough to tell how soon a JDK11
compatible LTS will be delivered, but once that's out, I'll happily upgrade the
Docker container that we're using.

Between Olivier, Daniel, and myself, we've had to babysit ci.j.io a *lot* more
over the past couple months due to various issues with Pipeline and Azure
plugins, so I'm loathe to take on any more operational risk by adopting a
weekly.



Cheers
--
GitHub:  https://github.com/rtyler

GPG Key ID: 0F2298A980EE31ACCA0A7825E5C92681BEF6CEA2
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 871 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.jenkins-ci.org/pipermail/jenkins-infra/attachments/20190403/e57f03dd/attachment.asc>


More information about the Jenkins-infra mailing list