Status: Resolved (View Workflow)
Defining branch "origin/test/*" build does not start with SCM poll. If the build is started by hand it is working, then it finds the change.
- is duplicated by
JENKINS-41997 Multi-Branch Project Plugin gets broken when the Branch API plugin is upgraded to 2.0.4
- is related to
JENKINS-41948 Scanning MultiBranchProject fails and logs NoSuchMethodError
- links to
Reverting to Branch API 1.11.1 + SCM API 2.0.1 + Github Branch Source 1.10.1 fixes this for me.
That plugin has not been released yet: https://wiki.jenkins-ci.org/display/JENKINS/Freestyle+Multibranch+Plugin or is it a different plugin you are referring to?
stephenconnolly I was referring to https://wiki.jenkins-ci.org/display/JENKINS/Multi-Branch+Project+Plugin
gcsventures So looking at that project type, there are a lot of hacks and some incorrect assumptions on how Branch API is supposed to work. I suspect the plugin maintainer would need to figure out how to correct their usage of Branch API now that the correct usage is documented.
That is assuming the plugin maintainer is still interested in that plugin, given that the wiki page directs towards pipeline I am unsure.
Certainly the code looks to have a lot of hacks enough that I cannot see what it is doing wrong, particularly scary from my PoV is that it doesn't seem to want to ensure that the branch details are stored with each branch job (storing in a property being fragile they way it has been implemented in the plugin, probably better to store in a side-file so that the UI config cannot remove)
There also seem to be some incorrect assumptions about source ids and other things.
https://github.com/jenkinsci/multi-branch-project-plugin/pull/145 is probably sufficient to limp this plugin along
Specifically this test should be confirming that this issue has been resolved
I'm hitting the same issue on a freestyle multibranch GitHub project. I think it's linked to https://issues.jenkins-ci.org/browse/JENKINS-41234
For me, this problem coincides with the SCM API 2.0 upgrade. For this reason, I think this bug might belong in the