• Type: Improvement
• Resolution: Unresolved
• Priority: Minor
• Component/s: atlassian-bitbucket-server-integration-plugin
• Labels:

  None
• Environment:

  Jenkins 2.401.3

[JENKINS-71770] Document "branchName" serialization compatibility between Bitbucket Server Integration 3.5.0 and 3.6.0

Kalle Niemitalo created issue - 2023-08-07 06:20

Kalle Niemitalo made changes - 2023-08-07 06:39

Summary

Original: Document the "branchName" compatibility between Bitbucket Server Integration 3.5.0 and 3.6.0

New: Document "branchName" serialization compatibility between Bitbucket Server Integration 3.5.0 and 3.6.0

Kalle Niemitalo made changes - 2023-08-08 09:59

Link

New: This issue is caused by JENKINS-71289 [ JENKINS-71289 ]

Kalle Niemitalo made changes - 2023-08-08 10:00

Description

Original: Upgrading the Bitbucket Server Integration plugin from 3.5.0 to 3.6.0 caused the "Manage Old Data" page of Jenkins to show notices about "branchName" in several builds. This seems to have been caused by [https://github.com/jenkinsci/atlassian-bitbucket-server-integration-plugin/pull/403], which modified BitbucketRevisionAction.java to replace {{private final String branchName}} with {{private final String refName}}. Please document in the 3.6.0 release notes of the plugin:  - That Jenkins will show "branchName" as old data.  - Whether there will be problems if a Jenkins administrator downgrades the plugin back to 3.5.0 or lower, after some builds have been done with 3.6.0 or higher. Please also consider whether {{hpi.compatibleSinceVersion}} should be set as described in [Mark a new plugin version as incompatible with older versions|https://www.jenkins.io/doc/developer/plugin-development/mark-a-plugin-incompatible/].

New: Upgrading the Bitbucket Server Integration plugin from 3.5.0 to 3.6.0 caused the "Manage Old Data" page of Jenkins to show notices about "branchName" in several builds. This seems to have been caused by [https://github.com/jenkinsci/atlassian-bitbucket-server-integration-plugin/pull/403] (for [JENKINS-71289]), which modified BitbucketRevisionAction.java to replace {{private final String branchName}} with {{private final String refName}}. Please document in the 3.6.0 release notes of the plugin:  - That Jenkins will show "branchName" as old data.  - Whether there will be problems if a Jenkins administrator downgrades the plugin back to 3.5.0 or lower, after some builds have been done with 3.6.0 or higher. Please also consider whether {{hpi.compatibleSinceVersion}} should be set as described in [Mark a new plugin version as incompatible with older versions|https://www.jenkins.io/doc/developer/plugin-development/mark-a-plugin-incompatible/].

Collapse comment: Dyon added a comment - 2023-08-11 00:57

Dyon added a comment - 2023-08-11 00:57

Hi there,

I have investigated this issue, I will document the manage old data issue as part of the 3.6.0 release notes.

As far as upgrading and then downgrading goes, i have found no issues with the actual builds and am able to run all jobs as normal. 
For now i don't think we are going to mark this as incompatible, but would love some feedback from dkjellin and mhenschke_atlassian on this issue. 

Expand comment: Dyon added a comment - 2023-08-11 00:57

Dyon added a comment - 2023-08-11 00:57 Hi there, I have investigated this issue, I will document the manage old data issue as part of the 3.6.0 release notes. As far as upgrading and then downgrading goes, i have found no issues with the actual builds and am able to run all jobs as normal.  For now i don't think we are going to mark this as incompatible, but would love some feedback from dkjellin and mhenschke_atlassian on this issue. 

Kalle Niemitalo made changes - 2023-08-11 09:09

Remote Link

New: This issue links to "Update changelog to explain that upgrading from 3.5.0 will cause Bran… · Pull Request #421 · jenkinsci/atlassian-bitbucket-server-integration-plugin (Web Link)" [ 28862 ]

Collapse comment: Kalle Niemitalo added a comment - 2023-08-11 12:03

Kalle Niemitalo added a comment - 2023-08-11 12:03

I imagine there might be a problem if a Jenkins administrator upgrades or downgrades the plugin during a build: after the build finishes, BitbucketBuildStatusFactoryImpl would call either bbs.setRef(revisionAction.getBranchAsRefFormat()) in 3.5.0 or bbs.setRef(revisionAction.getRefName()) in 3.6.0, and this would not use the correct ref string because BitbucketRevisionAction would not have deserialized the field of the other version. Bitbucket Server might then not display the build on the correct pull request. However, because the key of the build status would be correct anyway, I think this mismatch would not cause Bitbucket Server to leave the build in the INPROGRESS state.

Expand comment: Kalle Niemitalo added a comment - 2023-08-11 12:03

Kalle Niemitalo added a comment - 2023-08-11 12:03 I imagine there might be a problem if a Jenkins administrator upgrades or downgrades the plugin during a build: after the build finishes, BitbucketBuildStatusFactoryImpl would call either bbs.setRef(revisionAction.getBranchAsRefFormat()) in 3.5.0 or bbs.setRef(revisionAction.getRefName()) in 3.6.0, and this would not use the correct ref string because BitbucketRevisionAction would not have deserialized the field of the other version. Bitbucket Server might then not display the build on the correct pull request. However, because the key of the build status would be correct anyway, I think this mismatch would not cause Bitbucket Server to leave the build in the INPROGRESS state.