Uploaded image for project: 'Jenkins'
  1. Jenkins
  2. JENKINS-30781

Using the Rebuild Plugin puts the previous Build Trigger Badge instead of the user one

    Details

    • Type: Bug
    • Status: Open (View Workflow)
    • Priority: Minor
    • Resolution: Unresolved
    • Environment:
    • Similar Issues:

      Description

      While using the Build Trigger Badge plugin together with the Rebuild plugin the displayed icon of a build "rebuilt manually" is that of the previous build.
      I am not sure which is the proper behaviour. "Rebuilding Last" should indeed use the last build parameters but it should not preserve the Built Trigger Badge since it may cause confusion.
      A build that was previously triggered by a cron or by an upstream job should not display the same icon as the previous job when started using the Rebuild plugin.

      Steps to reproduce:
      1. Install the Rebuild plugin and the Build Trigger Badge plugin
      2. Create a Freestyle job and schedule it to run at a regular interval (I've set it to */2 * * * * , I believe this is once every two minutes)
      3. Let the job be triggered by the scheduler at least once.
      4. Notice that the Build Trigger Badge sets the icon to a watch, in the build history.
      5. Either as an anonymous user or logged in user rebuild previous build by clicking Rebuild Last
      6. Notice that when the job is rebuilt the trigger icon is that of the previous badge. In this case we have a watch icon even though the job was started manually by a human operator.

      See attached image BuildTriggerBadge_IconBug.png

        Attachments

          Activity

          Hide
          danny_mircea Daniel MIRCEA added a comment -

          Thanks Bapthiste M. for helping me report this.

          Show
          danny_mircea Daniel MIRCEA added a comment - Thanks Bapthiste M. for helping me report this.
          Hide
          batmat Baptiste Mathus added a comment -

          Sent https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/jenkinsci-users/dbpnkZfdxeA to users ML to gather feedback on friday 2 oct 2015.

          Hoping to get some answers. In the end, I guess I'll file a PR on the plugin (btw, not totally sure maintainers are still active, will have to check).
          Interestingly, didn't review its content, but there seems to be already a PR filed about that https://github.com/jenkinsci/rebuild-plugin/pull/4 (but not only, maybe why it was never merged);

          Show
          batmat Baptiste Mathus added a comment - Sent https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/jenkinsci-users/dbpnkZfdxeA to users ML to gather feedback on friday 2 oct 2015. Hoping to get some answers. In the end, I guess I'll file a PR on the plugin (btw, not totally sure maintainers are still active, will have to check). Interestingly, didn't review its content, but there seems to be already a PR filed about that https://github.com/jenkinsci/rebuild-plugin/pull/4 (but not only, maybe why it was never merged);
          Hide
          axd1967 alex d added a comment -

          Not related to this issue specifically, but it looks like the maintainers listed on the plugin page are no longer there, don't react to emails (some emails are even wrong).

          Judging from the github project, others have taken over this project...

          https://github.com/jenkinsci/rebuild-plugin

           

          Show
          axd1967 alex d added a comment - Not related to this issue specifically, but it looks like the maintainers listed on the plugin page are no longer there, don't react to emails (some emails are even wrong). Judging from the github project, others have taken over this project... https://github.com/jenkinsci/rebuild-plugin  
          Hide
          batmat Baptiste Mathus added a comment -

          alex d yes, we need to fix that some day. This value is extracted from the pom.xml currently. I think we should clarify the way (Using a Jenkins Enhancement Proposal) plugins has to be maintained, and make sure this data is up to date/reflecting the latest state. Which is indeed rarely the case for most plugins taken over by new maintainers.

          Show
          batmat Baptiste Mathus added a comment - alex d yes, we need to fix that some day. This value is extracted from the pom.xml currently. I think we should clarify the way (Using a Jenkins Enhancement Proposal) plugins has to be maintained, and make sure this data is up to date/reflecting the latest state. Which is indeed rarely the case for most plugins taken over by new maintainers.

            People

            • Assignee:
              Unassigned
              Reporter:
              danny_mircea Daniel MIRCEA
            • Votes:
              0 Vote for this issue
              Watchers:
              4 Start watching this issue

              Dates

              • Created:
                Updated: