 Welcome everyone. This is the Jenkins governance meeting. It's the 9th of January 2023. Thanks for being here. Topics on the agenda I had news. Action items. Elections. Build monitor view plugin. Governance board meeting time and date. Lost donations from ffs.de. I'm going to start with the CDF outreach. And if Oleg joins us. CDF topics and then community activity. Any other topics that need to go on the agenda today. Okay, great. Then let's let's go ahead with news. Wednesday we will release Jenkins 2.375.2. The next LTS in the 2.375 line. Thanks very much to everyone involved. Chris Stern is release lead. Thanks, Kevin, for writing the change log and the upgrade guide. The December 2022 newsletters being prepared. Thanks to Bruno Verochten for submitting the poll request to Alyssa Tong for gathering it. And to the contributors there are a number of things that I still have to contribute so we're not ready to merge yet but thank you very much for the progress. We had a Jenkins webinar on Google summer of code last month. And it's been a long time. And upcoming we've got Fosdom in Brussels February 4th and 5th. Alyssa is coordinating the Jenkins booth. In terms of any questions or comments on the news items. Okay, action items. Alex had the action item to help us require that. Community SIG office and other. As a manager or owner so that in case of issues we can get involved and actually make a difference. Anything you want to report there, Alex. Not hearing you Alex. Better. Yes, better. Okay. Okay. Yeah. Last week I had a chat with Koss okay. And he handed over ownership of the Brazilian, the Korean and the Japanese mailing list to me. Which I. Yeah, those three, one the Brazilian one, the Korean one and the Japanese one. Both three meeting language lists last used a few years ago. Which I have archived and in favor of community Jenkins at IO. The lists are still public accessible but no, but members can no longer post there. Great, thank you. Thanks very much. So was the archiving process difficult. Is it something that I know it's something that Kevin and I need to do with documentation list. Yeah, it's pretty simple and straightforward. If you go to the settings tab of the Google group, you can simply configure who can post that can be a mailing list member and manager or owner. If you simply change it to manager or owner the list is already read only. Great, thank you. Great. Thanks very much. Any questions from others on that progress. I did also, I did also mail Oleg and Olivier Vernon, but I didn't hear back from them yet. And those are for other lists for, for other lists. Yeah. Great. Excellent. Thank you. Anything else. Okay, I have the action item to create and distribute election badges. No progress. My apologies. I've got to go do the research to find out what that means and do the research, send them out before the next meeting. Kevin had the action item to use the community for the Jenkins docs mailing list. And as far as I understand, Kevin, no progress there. This is a, again, a mark weight thing. That's correct. Okay. This is my documentation by Oleg no progress as far as I've seen, but no requests in the ensuing month either. Okay, created an empty agenda item. This is working well. We'll keep doing it. Thanks to everyone who contributed to this agenda. It was really nice that I'm not the only one typing agenda proposals. Thank you very, very much. Next topic was. Combine the sub projects and six into a single concept working groups. That's no progress. But Mark to complete by end of before next meeting. I also will submit roadmap updates. The roadmap updates need to be approved by board members. And the good thing for me to do that as a series of small poll requests. The roadmap as currently listed is badly out of date needs to be updated. So expect to see those coming soon. Oleg had the action item to send a proposal to Rick to retire the Jenkins Chinese site. The site is not getting updates and hasn't been receiving updates for multiple years. No progress as far as I know. Anyone else have other information? Okay, then archive the governance meeting notes. Gavin has prepared. The archive. We need a need a destination repository. And I have the action item to bring that to closure, whether it should be in Jenkins info or in the Jenkins CI organization. Okay. I think that's a good question. I think it's the question was raised back by the infra team. Raised a question about the location of the repository. That's all that I had on action items. Any other action items that may have been missed. Okay. Next topics then. We had discussed in our last meeting, this open proposal to allow up to two elected board members from a single company and said, I think that's a good question. I think that's a good question. And then we have a final closure. Now, Uli, I know one of your concerns was that you were minus one. As you want to further explain your concerns here. So that others hear them and then, then we can have further discussion. I think that there's no much discussion required. I just before I work against my minus one. I'm not sure what your, you know, what was the reasoning for the whole thing because it was started before I entered the board. And yeah, since nobody actually replied to this requirement, this new requirement. So yeah. I think I'm not minus one. But I'm not plus one. So I'm here. Actually, I don't know why we are doing it really. I don't see the need to change anything now, but I'm not against it. So if you want to change it, you know, feel free to go. I'm sorry, if you open the next message, I did reply to the question. Yes, sorry. Nobody else. So my, my, my thinking about it was we need to have a discussion of all Jenkins developers about this topic. Since nobody besides Basil replied, we have no much developers left in Jenkins who are really interested in this topic. So yeah. So I won't block it just because I said it once before. So my reasoning was I want to block it for now because I don't want to go into the board and then I need to decide if I should change the rules. So because the rules. We are changing. Makes sense to be, yeah. We'll be, I think in the December next December or next November. The next election is so it's quite some time to go. And the reasoning of why I'm wondering is, I think, yeah. It's, it's not really important. So let's make the decision. And yeah, I'm fine with it. So I'm not plus one, but I will not block it. Okay. Are there others? Go ahead. So actually nobody could say until now why we need someone else in the board. So we have currently four persons in the board. Yeah, that's, I think it's fine enough. And yeah, we see how it will behave when the next elections came in one year. Well, but isn't it that if we don't, if we don't allow this rules change, we are assured that in the next election, we can at most have one person from cloud bees. And this, this reasoning that, that Basel gives and that I agree with a second person from cloud bees gives us a chance to do more, get more work done on governance action items. Yeah. And this reasoning I don't understand, but because we don't have so much action items in the governance board. So the last few meetings I was part of this meeting we have a couple of action items. So I'm not sure which action items you mean, which we don't work on. Well, so looking at, I'm the biggest, most guilty party here is, is the challenge. So, so things that, that I've struggled to complete include poll requests, right? Oh legs completion of the Chinese website. Oh legs completion of easy CLA. I mean, we've got a number of things that have lasted for a very long time as, as open action items on the, on the board's list of action items. Okay. Yeah, I think Mark you've done a heroic job with completing as many action items as you have, but even still there's, there's more that remain. Well, so part of my part of my rationale for the, the, the, another part, and it was a part that was not immediately obvious to me until later thought was that the current rules actually disadvantage two companies over any other company in the world. And that was when I was trying to describe later here of if Red Hat came and became actively involved. They could have two board members elected without any question any rules question, et cetera. Likewise, Google or JFrog or Microsoft, any one of them there are exactly two companies that are not allowed to have two board members. And that's because of the, the affiliation term we use with for Kosuke being affiliated with cloud bees and launchable. Yeah, but that does not, but that does not imply that we should change the rules in your way. I think we could change the rules that no company at all is allowed to have two seats in our four election seats. So I think one solution to your problem you're stating is that we change it in the way you proposed. But another proposal would be to say, okay, no company is allowed to have two seats, no company, even cloud bees and no Google, no Red Hat. Currently we have this problem in the definition because Kosuke is a part of cloud bees or his own company. But if we change the rule in other way, that means that we do not allow from these four members which are elected regularly, we can have a new rule saying that no company is allowed to have two seats of these four members. Then this problem will disappear as well. But then it really worsens the problem of getting the work done. Yeah, these are two different things. I don't want to mix these arguments. One argument is not the two companies or one company can have two seats. This is one argument. And the other argument is let's have our work done. I don't think that it makes sense to mix these arguments. Well, but I think we want to optimize results for the project. So I think we do need to mix those arguments, don't we? I don't think so. If we want to get more work done, we can have more seats in our group. That's far easier. And yet we did not have any contested seats in the last election. So adding more seats risks adding vacant seats. Why? I'm concerned that. When we have one seat and more than Basil can came in. Not if, not if. Because then we have not the majority. So my problem is that we don't have the majority from one company. But really, let's go ahead. I don't really want to discuss this thing anymore. From my perspective. So for me, it's fine. Just go ahead. So Uli, I think what you're saying, then just to be very clear, I think what you're saying, you're okay. If I call for a call for a vote in terms of. Of the proposed change. Yeah. Okay. All right. So then I'm going to, are there others who have concerns or, or. Items they want to avoid voice. Okay, then I'd like to call for a vote. All right. And as usual, we allow all who are participating to vote. So I'm going to call for a vote. And I try to dock. I will document those votes. So I'm going to say Mark. Mark W is Mark Waitress plus one. Uli, you had said you were. Zero. Yes. Zero is okay. Alex, I'm going to go to you next as the other member of the board, your vote. I'm plus one. Okay. Basil, you're next on my visible list. Next Kevin Martens. I see you visible on my list. Plus one for me as well. Okay. And Bruno. Let's come for me as well. Okay. All right. Okay. So based on that, my interpretation is we carry this forward with a yes. Accept the change. Any objections to that. Okay, great. Then let's go on to the next topic. Thank you. Thank you. Thanks everyone for the discussions. Uli, thank you very much for voicing your concerns. Next topic then build monitor view plugin. Basil, do you want to give us a, an overview here? Sure. The build monitor view plugin. It's non-standard and it's hosting and release process. And this has caused a number of pain points over the years. For example, when I was working on the guava project. I had to get a new release of this plugin out. And it was, it was difficult to do that. Given its non-standard release process. So to summarize the current state, it's, it's currently hosted in the Jan Molak GitHub organization. And uses GitHub actions for CI. And uses a custom CD. Which creates releases on every commit with, without any release notes, even for dependency updates. So one of the things that we've heard users complaining about is that there's no visibility into the content of these releases. So every so often when this topic comes up, I've offered to help normalize the release process for this plugin by moving it to our standard model of the Jenkins CI GitHub organization. Using Jenkins for CI. Using our standard project-wide CD setup and using release drafter to document the contents of the release. So I think this would solve the pain for users because this would avoid creating releases for dependency updates, which our process does not do. Unless the developer label is applied. And also it would give us release notes with release drafter. And in general, it would make it much easier to do releases of this plugin. For example, if there's a future UI change that requires that plugin to be adapted, it would be much easier to release that change if this plugin was using our standard process. So I had a discussion with the author of this plugin, and he noted that there were some conditions that he wanted our assurances about in order to transfer their repository to our GitHub organization. And one of them was retaining a note about the original author in the readme, which I thought should be noncontroversial. That seems something that we could easily accommodate. The other request was to retain the current noninvasive footer linking to his website. So this is on the bottom right corner of the user interface. There is this link to the author's website inside of the Jenkins UI. So you could you could call it branding, for example. But so that's, so this is already there in the current code that's hosted in his GitHub organization. But we are currently publishing this on our update center and have been for a very long time so this wouldn't be a new edition but rather this would be assuring the author that this existing link could be retained even as we move the hosting of the repository into our own GitHub organization. So that was a topic that I didn't feel that I could give him an answer one way or another as an individual, which is why I wanted to bring this topic to the board. But if the board does confirm that these conditions are acceptable, then I can proceed with normalizing the hosting and release of this plugin comments from others. Any concerns there. Yeah, I definitely agree with basil. I think I mean the Jenkins CI organization is definitely an umbrella organization for plugins hosted. And I strongly believe that plugins available on the update center should preferably hosted on the Jenkins CI organization. So yeah I think we should move on and get the repository transferred or fall to our organization. So and Alex I think specifically the question would be, are you okay with the conditions that the that the author or the yeah the original author has asked for for me I'm quite comfortable with those I feel like those are quite fair. I have no objections. Are you okay with them. Yeah, that sounds good to me. Do we have a screenshot of this, how this photo looks like. I don't. I don't mean the coat of the how it looks in Jenkins right right you wanted the visual. I don't have it. I don't have one that I can certainly embed one. I would expect this is not very in, as said not very not terribly invasive, because it's just sitting inside the footer. I have one somewhere I can pull it up before the end of this meeting. And how many people are using this plugin. Oh that's a good thing to check we have that answer installed in 16,000 of 300,000 installations so. And so something what is that less than 5%. But it's still enough that we can't release a court change that breaks this plugin so if you if you look at the releases tab of this you'll see the problem that users have been complaining about which is that none of this information is really is relevant I mean it's all. There's no there's no information about the content of these releases. It's actually not even picking up on this page the newer builds from 2022. And all of this is all this is due to the non standard scheme that is being used which is not it's not a bad scheme it's just that it's not the same as the scheme we use elsewhere so all of our tooling doesn't pick it up. So really, are you I found the screenshot I can share it in a minute or two here. Oh, you. You say you need a little bit of time to get ready to share. Yeah, let me just upload it somewhere. Okay, great. So I think it makes sense to move it to tank and see I. And if someone does not like the advertisement, I think we can, or the person who does not like it can fork the repository and create another one. So that's fine. Good okay. I'm, I'm as well comfortable with it anyone else have objections or concerns. Okay, I think it's, I think it's a good idea just to normalize and improve consistency. So, I think one other requirement that John had about making sure that his test suite was still enabled. So I'm still discussing that. But there's some problems with the test suite as well that that that were that basically the test suite is not currently working so we have to figure out what to do about that. I'm confident that I can come to a conclusion with john about the test suite, as long as these other conditions are accepted. Great. Thank you. Thanks very much. So the suite is currently broken. Yeah, the tests are not currently passing so the question I think is, do we want to go ahead with moving it to the Jenkins see I get help organization without running the tests, I turn them off which I think, I think john didn't want us to turn off the tests but my perspective was more that I don't think I would be making the situation worse by doing that, since they're already broken. So right, we've got to figure out if if somebody can get these tests passing again, or how much work that is. They also use a non standard test harness. So that's another complicating factor but we could probably come to a conclusion about that. With some more discussion. Hopefully, we could find a way to just fix these tests but if we can't then I'm sure that we could find a way to at least not make it any worse than it is today. Great. Any other discussion before we call for vote here on on the decision. I still want to see the screenshot or no. Oh yes please do want to so I'm going to stop sharing, or I can, if you want to just post the location of your of your, your screen share that you uploaded. It's a private link so it'll be easier if I just share my screen. Great. Okay. Okay. Can you see my screen now. Oh yes, yes. So this is, this is a screenshot of the plugins UI. And if you see on the bottom right corner it just says brought to you by John Malek. Can you see that really. Okay. I think it's okay. Just. Okay. Right. All right, I'll stop sharing. Yeah, that, at least to me that that doesn't look at all I mean we've got, I'm confident we've got much worse things than that in some other plugins so that's, that looks great. Yeah. All right, so call for vote then. Uli. That's one. So, Alex. Last one. What's the final puzzle plus one. Kevin. Plus one. No. Fine with me plus one. Great. Thank you. All right. And I'm plus one. Thanks very much everyone. Anything else on the on that topic. The next topic then was the governance board meeting time and date so thanks everyone for being here. The doodle poll. I had total of five responses and this time worked. Let me double check are all of you okay with this as a working time for your meeting for our meeting. Yes. Great. Okay, I see heads waving and that's that's, go ahead Uli. I think we need to check this again when we are switching to summertime. Yes, yes, but for now it's pretty fun. Right. In fact, that's a good point. We've found in the past that when, when governments change clocks we typically want to adjust our meeting time to fit our, our, our personal schedules again, and so we will just plan to negotiate that. Next time the government's metal metal with clocks, please, please lobby your elected representatives to stop government meddling with clocks but that's a different problem. Yeah, should we add an action item on anybody. No, no, I've had that action item for years and made no progress. The next topic was lost donations from ffs.de so Uli, I guess this one starts with a Kevin closing out the website topic and you bringing it back could you share with us some of the status etc. The, the, the item which is in this issue is not about the website. It's about the lost earnings we got from the German donations. There were a couple of thousand dollars, which were in this website ffs.de. This is a German, you know, affiliation, or it was a German affiliation now, I think the link is almost that and I think they don't work anymore. We, it was in my election period, or in my last election period I started to work on this issue because I'm from Germany so I tried to reach the contact person. And actually they still exist, but they don't react so without using a lawyer I think we don't have a chance to see or get our money back so I'm not sure if it's worth the effort. So I think it's okay to close this issue and now we have a good documented approach on where the donations should go. And we should not make such spin offs in the future anymore. Thank you. Well, and thanks for your work on that that I was really impressed to see this from two years ago official documentation making the request etc. Thanks for doing that and I, I agree that I don't think it's worth our energy to attempt to follow legal recourse because I suspect the money is gone and the person will just at least if it's consistent with US law will just waste money on a lawyer and still not get any money. Yeah. Great. Thank you. Yeah so Linux Foundation is is our their community bridge system is our way of accepting donations now. And that feels like a much more trustworthy location, and I agree with your phrasing no spin offs in the future no, no alternate paths to attempt to collect donations. Anything else on the last donations topic. Okay, CDF outreach reboot this is just FYI that the meeting was held and now will be happening. I believe once a month they'll meet as an outreach group from CDF to help increase the adoption, some of the action items that came out of that meeting include included ways to help the Jenkins project as we're broadening and deepening involvement in Google Summer of Code, how to encourage more mentors, etc. I'm going to delete the CDF topic since Oleg's not here today. The last topic I had was community activity and this is just at my attempt to summarize things that I'm seeing in the online forums and communities. So Google Summer of Code interest is definitely growing. We're certainly needing more act more mentors and more project ideas. Thanks to Basel to Bruno and to several others for good ideas across a broad range of topics, everything from documentation site to plug in maintenance to programming improvements are all included in the set of ideas. More ideas welcomed and more mentors certainly encouraged. We've also had questions and discussions on Gitter chat and on community dot Jenkins that IO in some specific areas, commonly configuration is code. And netties and pipelines and pipeline shared libraries are recurring themes. So as we go forward, being aware of those we may find ways to better document them better describe them or address the questions in advance. And then the big one thanks to Bruno for assembling for Basel for suggesting topics and concepts and to Kevin for content work. And this letter is intended to cover 12 months of Jenkins progress. So Basel or Bruno submitted the poll request, I've got some things that I need to add to it I'm sure. And as we were going back over the list, it's an amazing thing that's happened in the Jenkins project in 12 months. And so we've had questions, improvements, platform changes, major library upgrades major major changes in all sorts of things and a continued growing installed base. So congratulations, thanks to everyone in the Jenkins project. Oh, thank you Mark to any other topics that you wanted to be sure we review today in governance board. Let's call it an end for today. Thanks very, very much.