Uploaded image for project: 'Jenkins'
  1. Jenkins
  2. JENKINS-31118

Workflow jobs that are waiting for input should have a visual cue in build history

    XMLWordPrintable

Details

    Description

      When a Workflow job is waiting for input, the current visual cue for that is that the ball blinks when you look at the job history. It doesn't blink on the main Jenkins job list page. Further, if you restart Jenkins, the ball for paused jobs stops blinking even though they're still paused and can be resumed.

      I'm not a fan of the blinking ball visual cue because all of my users keep seeing that and thinking their jobs are "stuck" or "still building" or whatever. I think we need a special badge or ball color or something to make it clear that the job is in the 'waiting for input' state. It would also be ideal if this was visible on the Jenkins main page as well.

      Attachments

        Issue Links

          Activity

            jglick Jesse Glick added a comment -

            Yes this is a long-discussed RFE. With the stage view (at job level) you do get a special badge on those build rows waiting for input, which could be made more prominent, but anyway we still need some mechanism (on a view page, perhaps) for showing you all builds of any job awaiting approval (ideally filtered by those you could actually approve, when submitter is specified). Adding a list view column is too intrusive. I think Jenkins needs a general-purpose notification system that the input step could hook into. (There is a system of administrative monitors, but restricted to administrators looking at the Manage Jenkins page.)

            It doesn't blink on the main Jenkins job list page. Further, if you restart Jenkins, the ball for paused jobs stops blinking

            If true, both smell like bugs. The ball for a job should match that of its latest build, which should be animated if the build is still in progress. I am pretty sure I have seen this all working in the past 24 hours, but there may be specific conditions you hit where this breaks. Anyway if you can reproduce from scratch please file separately to avoid distraction here.

            (Workflow 1.8+ does intentionally hide the “flyweight” executor from the master section of the executor widget when the build is paused, or indeed doing something in a step like sh but not actively running Groovy code. But this is unrelated to the build history widget and to ball colors.)

            jglick Jesse Glick added a comment - Yes this is a long-discussed RFE. With the stage view (at job level) you do get a special badge on those build rows waiting for input, which could be made more prominent, but anyway we still need some mechanism (on a view page, perhaps) for showing you all builds of any job awaiting approval (ideally filtered by those you could actually approve, when submitter is specified). Adding a list view column is too intrusive. I think Jenkins needs a general-purpose notification system that the input step could hook into. (There is a system of administrative monitors, but restricted to administrators looking at the Manage Jenkins page.) It doesn't blink on the main Jenkins job list page. Further, if you restart Jenkins, the ball for paused jobs stops blinking If true, both smell like bugs. The ball for a job should match that of its latest build, which should be animated if the build is still in progress. I am pretty sure I have seen this all working in the past 24 hours, but there may be specific conditions you hit where this breaks. Anyway if you can reproduce from scratch please file separately to avoid distraction here. (Workflow 1.8+ does intentionally hide the “flyweight” executor from the master section of the executor widget when the build is paused, or indeed doing something in a step like sh but not actively running Groovy code. But this is unrelated to the build history widget and to ball colors.)
            marcesher Marc Esher added a comment -

            Big +1 on this. Right now, it's very hard to tell when something is waiting on input unless you know exactly what you're looking for. Making it more obvious / prominent would be a big UX win.

            Related, I had a job that kicked off, and we didn't know it was waiting on input. Several days later, the thing is still waiting, and then it wouldn't abort or proceed when we clicked the links, no matter how many times. The job would not cancel, either. The only thing that cleared out its cobwebs was a Jenkins restart.

            marcesher Marc Esher added a comment - Big +1 on this. Right now, it's very hard to tell when something is waiting on input unless you know exactly what you're looking for. Making it more obvious / prominent would be a big UX win. Related, I had a job that kicked off, and we didn't know it was waiting on input. Several days later, the thing is still waiting, and then it wouldn't abort or proceed when we clicked the links, no matter how many times. The job would not cancel, either. The only thing that cleared out its cobwebs was a Jenkins restart.
            jglick Jesse Glick added a comment -

            Intend for Blue Ocean to handle this sort of thing at a higher level.

            jglick Jesse Glick added a comment - Intend for Blue Ocean to handle this sort of thing at a higher level.
            thokari Thomas Hirsch added a comment -

            Why is this labelled as "Wont' Do"?
            In the current state this is absolutely horrible. Also the fact that you have to click another three times or so in order to enter the parameters, after triggering a run manually.

            To use this properly I would need to integrate chat notifications or something to let a developer know when Jenkins has processed the branch, and send him the link that directly points him to the page where he has to put whatever information is missing.

            This is very hard to sell to developers that they now have to click through some navigation path, where before the parameters would show directly after starting a job.

            I agree that development and release automation should not require input at all, and I am working right now on getting rid of it, but as it stands, we do still have it right now...

            thokari Thomas Hirsch added a comment - Why is this labelled as "Wont' Do"? In the current state this is absolutely horrible. Also the fact that you have to click another three times or so in order to enter the parameters, after triggering a run manually. To use this properly I would need to integrate chat notifications or something to let a developer know when Jenkins has processed the branch, and send him the link that directly points him to the page where he has to put whatever information is missing. This is very hard to sell to developers that they now have to click through some navigation path, where before the parameters would show directly after starting a job. I agree that development and release automation should not require input at all, and I am working right now on getting rid of it, but as it stands, we do still have it right now...
            amdokamal S. Panchenko added a comment -

            Sorry to bring this up again. We also needed this feature, but we accomplished this via Badge-Plugin. There is another workaround:

            currentBuild.description = "waiting for manual input"
            input message: ‘Approve Deploy?’, ok: ‘Yes’
            currentBuild.description = ""
            
            amdokamal S. Panchenko added a comment - Sorry to bring this up again. We also needed this feature, but we accomplished this via Badge-Plugin . There is another workaround: currentBuild.description = "waiting for manual input" input message: ‘Approve Deploy?’, ok: ‘Yes’ currentBuild.description = ""

            People

              jglick Jesse Glick
              owenmehegan Owen Mehegan
              Votes:
              10 Vote for this issue
              Watchers:
              12 Start watching this issue

              Dates

                Created:
                Updated:
                Resolved: