Uploaded image for project: 'Jenkins'
  1. Jenkins
  2. JENKINS-44820

Parallel branches with no stage should not be displayed in Blue Ocean

    Details

    • Similar Issues:

      Description

      With the following pipeline:

      stage("begin") { println "begin" }
      
      parallel (
          "no_stage": { println "no stage" },
          
          "": { println "no name" },
          
          "with_stage": { stage("my_stage") { println "named stage" } }
      )
      
      stage("end") { println "end" }
      

      we are getting the following display in BlueOcean:

      But in the parallel step, only the third branch has a stage defined, and therefore only this one is expected to be displayed. Unfortunately all the branches are displayed even if not containing any stage.
      Additionally, the name displayed for the third branch is the branch name instead of the stage name as one would have thought.

      On the other hand, in the Pipeline view it is displayed as expected:

      Use case: technical steps which need to run in parallel to maintain shared resources, advance timeout monitoring, etc ... doesn't have to pollute the Blue Ocean view.

      May be possible to add a boolean option to the parallel step not to use branch name as default display name in Blue Ocean, and eventually make branch with no stage invisible ?

        Attachments

          Issue Links

            Activity

            Hide
            jamesdumay James Dumay added a comment -

            Jean-Paul G you wouldn't be able to put both parallel syntaxes within the same stage with the proposal as it stands

            Show
            jamesdumay James Dumay added a comment - Jean-Paul G you wouldn't be able to put both parallel syntaxes within the same stage with the proposal as it stands
            Hide
            jguigui Jean-Paul G added a comment -

            I hope you may reconsider the RFC. Definitely by splitting the execution (branch) and the display (stage) concepts, users will be given a much better flexibility. 

            Show
            jguigui Jean-Paul G added a comment - I hope you may reconsider the RFC. Definitely by splitting the execution (branch) and the display (stage) concepts, users will be given a much better flexibility. 
            Hide
            jamesdumay James Dumay added a comment -

            Jean-Paul G its still in the planning stages so I will consider when driving a decision on this one

            Show
            jamesdumay James Dumay added a comment - Jean-Paul G its still in the planning stages so I will consider when driving a decision on this one
            Hide
            jguigui Jean-Paul G added a comment -

            Great ! Thank you very much 

            Jean-Paul

            Show
            jguigui Jean-Paul G added a comment - Great ! Thank you very much  Jean-Paul
            Hide
            jamesdumay James Dumay added a comment -

            Merging this within JENKINS-47799 as it will likely be the solution we are heading towards.

            Show
            jamesdumay James Dumay added a comment - Merging this within JENKINS-47799 as it will likely be the solution we are heading towards.

              People

              • Assignee:
                Unassigned
                Reporter:
                jguigui Jean-Paul G
              • Votes:
                3 Vote for this issue
                Watchers:
                3 Start watching this issue

                Dates

                • Created:
                  Updated:
                  Resolved: