 to one. Welcome to the European Docs Office Hours for Jenkins. This is the August 4th edition. And we have quite a few items on our agenda for today. First, we'll have some action items that Mark will just give us a brief update on. We'll have a discussion about there's been some updates to the page looking feel for Jenkins. We'll discuss that in some of the other discussions that have come up since it being merged. If Vihana is here, he'll be able to give us a quick update on Google Summer Code and where things are at on the latest issue that he's got. We have a new Blue Ocean status message that was added to the Blue Ocean Docs pages. This is to reset expectations and align with the current and future for Blue Ocean. We've got an item for discussing the search improvements for Jenkins.io, the next baseline selection, the commercial support page that Gavin's proposed and we started talking about previously. The fact that change log entries can come from multiple repositories. We have the Jenkins 2.346.3 change log and upgrade guide with the release coming out on August 10th, so that's in progress. And then just some tooling updates for Java 11 as that will be the requirement with the September LTS and is the weekly requirement now. So is there anything else that we need to add to the agenda or any items that we want to make sure are discussed as well? Nothing else from me. Vihana, I assume you're okay talking about your project. Oh, yes. Excellent. Okay, then Mark, if you want to start us off and if you have any info for the action items there. Yeah, so I still have to hang my head in shame, no progress on any of the action items. Although I take it back, I have started writing the blog post on Sheikot Africa Contributon and it'll probably be done today and submit it. So I guess I have started some action. It's just nothing visible yet. So keep your eyes open for pull request review later today. That was good. Thank you very much. Great. So then to start us off, Vihana, would you like to share what you've been up to on the Google Summer Code? Yes, sure. So last week the pull request for the deprecated label was merged. So that was the first task after the midterm evaluation and now the big task is to reduce the content of the pipeline step documentation. So I have been looking into some approaches for that and I put a ticket on the channel and in that I've mentioned some of the things that I've tried. And I noticed that making changes in the two ASCII docs, the ASCII doc generation Java class, is actually much harder than making changes to the ASCII docs that we have that are generated in the class. So I am looking at making something like a post-processing system rather than a pre-processing system because those functions are recursively calling each other and getting the depth of the nested choice of objects becomes quite hard to track. So basically I'm visualizing the documentation like a tree and so each parameter would represent the root node and inside we have the nested choice which would be the following nodes and the very end the last parameters would be like the leaves. And we just want to find the depth of these so that we can maybe separate out the deeper parts of the tree on to a newer page. But that was becoming quite hard to track since as I said the two functions were calling each other recursively and the depth was, I tried some algorithm but the depth was coming off to be wrong. So then I thought that it would be easier to work on strings rather than working on iterating Java objects because if we have an ASCII doc we will just do a file reader on that and once we have the string array of the lines we can maybe read for the tags. So for example we see an entire tag is between some LI tags and even in between them if we have LI tags we know that the root will be closed if we are able to find the equal number of closing tags as well. So basically just like an opening closing brace math sequence. So we know that it is completed then we have the equal number of closing braces. So that is giving me some good results. So I can probably share my screen and show some of the results that I got from that. Yeah, go ahead and I'll just stop sharing my screen so you can pick over. Sure, right away. So sharing now, is it visible? Yes, it is. Okay, great. So I basically wrote a processing class for it, the process ASCII doc. It's not doing much right now. It's maybe just for some research things I've added some code to see. So as you can see I'm measuring these number of lines that are encapsulated within one single initiative choice of objects for different ASCII docs. And these are all the ASCII docs that are on the documentation page. So I downloaded one of the all ASCII.zip file and unzipped over here. So I'll show you some interesting results that I saw. So for example, the workflow multi-branch, in that the necessary choice of objects which is present, it has 146,000 lines. And similarly if we scroll for different things, and this is not the worst thing, trust me. So like workflow SCM is by far the largest space that we have. Even the ticket I mentioned the size in MB, it was around four and a half MB. It's just quite a lot for an ASCII doc. And once we run the JavaScript on that page, the page basically hangs. So for me, whenever I try to click on that page, it at least takes around two minutes for that page to load. So yeah, this is it. And the next thing that I found very surprising was the amount of redundancies that were presented in the ASCII doc. So I have one example for you right now. So the GitSCM parameter, the choice is actually present at 10 different places in the documentation. So for example, we have two occurrences of the exact same block of GitSCM. This might contain thousands of lines. So basically I am talking about the, just for reference, I'll show you what it looks on the front-end side. So that we know how much content is getting repeated in the documentation. This new nabba looks great, by the way. The only problem for me on my machine is a lot of content is getting clipped from the top. So I have to zoom out to see the upper part. I'm using a 14-inch laptop. So maybe we can rectify that in future updates. Yeah. So basically all content within this GitSCM. So this has many more nestings within itself. So as you can see, all of these. So this would be fair to assume it would have around a thousand lines of ASCII doc within itself. And this is getting repeated. The exact same content is repeated twice in g.dot.pdoc and four times in pipeline guruv.pdoc. The exact same content, as you can see, is not changing. Nothing is changing. So this is basically present at 10 different places. So my goal would be to separate all the SCM providers and localize them to a different URL altogether. And once that is done, all these places would simply contain the hyperlink to that page. And instead of showing the entire, containing the entire documentation at every local position, they will just point down to their new page, which would be presented in the, like, ASCII docs, which are on the website. So maybe inside a folder, SCM would be the folder. And inside that we'll have git, bit bucket, CVS, et cetera. And all these places would simply have the hyperlink to that page. And in that way, we'll be able to get it done. So yeah. So these were some things that I noticed. And now I am working on enhancing the processing part. And let's see how it goes along. So Veehan, actually, we may want you to continue sharing. I had some questions. Are you okay if I ask you some questions? Your show, please. Okay. So, and it's sort of, maybe let's take this one first. It's the closest. Ben, I've got a question even back to the deprecated. So this one, I think what you were showing was the Jira plugin that had that duplicated content inside of it. Is that correct? And yet when I look on the Jira plugins page on jankins.io for the pipeline steps, I don't see where that might be visible. Have you been able to find, is this just inadvertently embedding something that then is completely hidden? Or maybe, maybe if you can show me some more. Let me just share my entire screen and we'll find it together. Well, and I wonder if I'm looking at a different plugin than you are. Go ahead. Okay. Okay. So I think there's a zoom update. So now we can hold control to select multiple windows. That's pretty cool. Okay. So let's search for it together. Sit this one. So we have for Jira, your Jira steps and Jira. So we want to look into Jira. Okay. This one. All right. Okay. So you're looking at the same one I was looking in, but I did not see in my attempt to expand things. I didn't see that text. Now I haven't looked at the page source. Okay. So this looks interesting. What we can try is I can run this locally and maybe disable the JavaScript, but there's not, there's not a lot of content on this page. Let me see what the title of it is. Well, or, or let's grab a keyword from it. So it was, okay. It, it was, it says it's Jira plugin. Choose some, keep scrolling down and let's choose some non. Okay. So Jira issue selector. Jira issue selector. We are looking at this here. Okay. Let's see which that contains that get a zero bar. There it is. Yeah. KB, DB server instance. Okay. Jennings, Gene, your server SCM. This is the main class under which we have to look for Yeah. And branch. Must be one more level. Okay. So maybe it's, maybe it's just something for you to investigate separately because that, that embedding looks disastrous. And yet I don't see it on the page. And when I look at the size of the web page and its source, it's, it doesn't look at least to me like it's, like it's huge. And I would have expected that based on what you were seeing for that page to be absolutely huge. Huh. Is that how you check the page size? All I did was do a right click on the page and view page source and then look at the size of the scroll bar. That's, that's not a terribly, that's not a very analytic method, but, but it was, Hey, that scroll bar is not huge. Oh, okay. So yeah, there's something to investigate here. That's pretty cool. But like I was able to find the location on the pipeline groovy and the workroom but I'm so good. Okay. Let's look at those. Maybe I can show you for the pipeline groovy. That's because that I know exactly where it is. Okay. You know, this page takes a while to load. That's not actually the content in MDs is the Java script that has to work hard, iterate, and then collapse the sections. Okay. Okay. So we're done. So we have here modern CM and in this legacy and here it is. So the entire same thing as checkout. So we have the name, branch, branches, name, browser, everything is the same. Right. Right. And, and, and that I think I see your point there and that absolutely is, is expected based on the current structure and certainly blots the page, right? Because what it lists is every known modern SCM implementation and, and therefore, and, and it's right inside the page content. You're correct. It's because it's a static page. Good. Thank you. Good. Good. Detection. So basically all these are coming, like we have bitkeeper on the checkout. So all these are basically the, there's a lot of repetition. So what I'm proposing is for each one of them, this collapsible section will turn into a clickable link. And we'll have one single page for get SCM one for harvest. And that way, I guess it would be easier for the user to identify as well. On that page, we can maybe help them in identifying which plugin that particular class is coming from. So now it's very hard for them to know, okay, from, from after which plugin am I able to choose this as a class. So that is what Christian was also looking for. So this is also one big improvement that yeah, we want to implement. Was there anything else? Yes. No, that's, that's great. Thank you. I like that very much. So that covered that topic. Then if we could rewind back one topic, if you're okay, that would be with deprecated. So you mentioned that deprecated has been, has been deployed, but could you show us the page and let's talk about how deprecated is presented to the user. Okay. So this was the example that I think was in the ticket SCM HDD client. And so once we go into that, you're able to see the deprecated label next to the plugin now. Okay. Okay. So the, the fact that, that for instance, the GitHub plug, oh, okay, I was trying to understand why artifact Z did not have, but in this case, that's the case of artifact Z. It's not a deprecated plugin. It's a deprecated part of the documentation that's in the plugin. And so the word deprecated appear. What you're showing me is, in fact, SCM HDD client is deprecated and it correctly shows that it's a deprecated plugin there. And if I open the plugin site, it shows it's deprecated as well. Good. I understand. Thank you. Thanks for helping me on that. I had just failed to understand. Sure. And like, oh, so for the steps that have been deprecated, it's not hired by me. It's by default, the name, it's coming with this step. Right. And, and that's also something that go, go back one. So I wanted to double check one more. So back to your search for deprecated. Okay. And the Dynatrace application monitoring plugin, that one. Okay. Let's see. And it is deprecated. Okay. Good. So, and that one on the plugin site says coming soon. Also deprecated. Good. Okay. Great. So, so that's the piece I needed. Thanks for the clarity. Sure. And I think there's the current build of the documentation after one after the deprecated one. So in which I didn't make any changes has a meshed up the plugin names slightly. So the, some of the names are missing. So for example, check out is no longer coming in the pipeline SCF step. It's getting fed into core and like core is getting crowded by all these things like Zulep also it's not able to find the plugin name. And basically this happens when there's a method known as get plugin name for descriptor. And once it is not able to find the name, it sends all of them to core. And it's not supposed to happen like this because earlier we just have had a couple of steps in core and others were in their respective plugins. So this may be, I'm not sure why this has occurred. I've also noted this to Christian, the officers. And maybe we can do a force build on the, for this repository and let's see if the new one is a better and if it's not, then we can investigate. Yeah, I am, I am happy to. So thank you for noting this one. Would you mind putting an issue report into the Jenkins.io, IO GitHub issues to note this problem because I think we want to get this one fixed quickly. Right. Okay, I'll do that. I'll create an issue and I'll probably. Thank you. And I will, I'm making myself a note to run the, run the doc generator job. It runs, does it run weekly, daily? I don't remember how often it runs. Oh, I think in the Cronus weekly. Okay. Not sure, but of course, as far as I can remember. Okay. So if it's weekly and it hasn't run since 2.362, then it may have been affected by a bug we detected in 2.361. We fixed it in 362. So, so this may, it may be as simple as run the generator again now that 362 is available and watch it work. Kevin, would you be willing to put a note in the, in the meeting notes and give me an action item that run the doc generator again? Thanks for, thanks for showing this, Vihon. You've once again shown something very, very helpful that I wasn't aware. And I think if, if it's not fixed magically by, by running it again, i.e. by having had the bug fixed in 32.362, then we, we probably need you to take some deep dive to understand what's changed, what broke it. Sure. Sure. All right. So do you still want me to create the GitHub issue for that, or do we want to test the rerun, rebuilding once again? Good. You know what, let me just run it and if it fails, I'll create the ticket. That way, that way we know, we know the result and the result is represented exactly in the, in the ticket. If it, if we didn't need a GitHub issue for it, it'll just be fixed and there'd be no value to the, the GitHub issue. So let me create the issue if I see a problem. Sure. Please tag me on that and I'll be on it if it's not fixed. We'll do. Thank you. All right. Then I guess this is from my sake. Yeah, you can take it forward from you. Okay. Great. Thanks Vihon. Really appreciate it. And just to reiterate, that looks amazing. I really appreciate what you're doing and investigating and working on with the Jenkins project. Like this is all very amazing and helpful. So yeah, thank you. I'd appreciate it. Cool. All right. So, just to touch base on the look in the field page improvements. So this was something that was submitted recently within the last month by contributor. And frankly, the page, I think it looks great, but there have been some challenges as far as the font being updated goes. And just other small things, but nothing too major. However, the font really needs to be what it's already been updated to. So while this ticket has been merged, we do have a revert ticket open as well. In addition to the submitter, contributors themselves also having an updated issue where they've corrected the fonts. So this is something that's been happening over the last couple of days. And just wanted to bring it to the community to discuss how does the improvements look? How does the age feel now? Is there anything else that anyone might notice or pick up on as they're reviewing it, reviewing it? You know, these are all things that we want to capture here. So yeah. So my question here was, I appreciate Daniel's comment visible on the screen now. Can we just revert this already? I'm not really ready to revert it because my personal preference is keep it and go forward. Try to resolve his concerns rather than revert it and try to do them again. I feel like it's a generally positive improvement. We had Gavin Mogan's involvement and Gavin has been willing to adapt the plug-in site to handle it as well. And so I wanted to hear other people's opinions. Shall we go forward or shall we take Daniel's recommendation and go back and try again in a series of smaller steps? So I'm going to ask each. Bruno, your opinion. Vihan, your opinion and then Kevin. Well, I would say go forward. But I don't know if that's easier or more difficult than to revert and go forward. I would prefer. Yeah. So Vihan, your perception? Could I say the issue that was created and because of which we want to revert it, maybe if it is open, I don't have a link to it. 534 is it? Yes, it is 534, which has been, this one has been closed. This one specifically. This is the newest version of Daniel's comments and public requests essentially here. Oh, okay. As I mentioned, the problem with me was the number overflowing and flipping my content. But I think it is fixable. And the new page looks nice. So I would say we can go ahead with this. And I have already voiced my enjoyment of the page itself. I like the background, the font, the color updates, the blues a little bit warmer and a little less abrasive on the eyes. I think it flows really nicely. And like Mark said, the Gavin's gone ahead and already updated the plugins page to match. So this work is being done. It's already been done. And I think it would be really valuable to keep this and move forward and update as we go. Innovation is the name of the game. And I would love to just see us move forward and iterate on that. Okay. So Kevin, could you help me with one more tour item? Let's go back to the documentation or back to the notes for the meeting. I think there's a link to the new poll request that's to repair it. Yeah. So that bullet that says new, okay, this one, could you look at the preview here? I wanted to see if the rest of us see, okay, is the font improved, et cetera, et cetera. Okay. Now my eyes don't, well, I guess there's a difference there, right? So let's see, could you put them side by side somehow? Is there a way for me to see them both together? Yes. So, okay. The font does look bigger on the one you were at before and now smaller. Okay. Let me just make sure, yeah, I'm on the right percentage zoom and everything for a bold screen. Yeah. Okay. So that's, so it's moved a little different. It looks, and yeah, the font's definitely a little different. Okay. So the, and we're on the, we're on the production site now. Switch back to the preview site. Yeah. Yeah, that's, that's not a dramatic change. Okay. My eyes didn't see a dramatic change. Yeah. And I think I feel as though I saw these being called out by Daniel. Okay. And those were, and that's part of the change. So let's show a comparison between those two. Yes. And so this is how it currently looks on the production site. This is how it looks. Yeah. Okay. And the new look there is, is much better. Okay. Good. Thank you. Yep. And, and my screen and just for the, for the reference is my screen is a much larger monitor than what beyond is using. So my nav bar, I don't think it's going to have the same issues as far as appearing and rendering goes. But I know that that was something that came up in the conversation of the original pull request and it's part of the original pull request. So there was something there for sure. Okay. All right. So it feels to me like at least as the group of the four of us here, we're okay with pressing forward. I'll probably have a conversation with Daniel separately and, and see, okay, it may, he may disagree strongly with it. I tend to trust Daniel's judgment. He's very smart and very capable. And so I need to have that conversation with him. But, but it feels like we want to press forward. I'll check it also in Asia office hours later today to see, see what people's sense of it is. Great. Thanks, Kevin. Thanks very much. Thank you, Mark. Okay. So next thing on the list is just quick update. So the Blue Oceans that we have updated, I've updated the Blue Ocean docs pages with a Blue Ocean status message. This is to properly set expectations for Blue Ocean, where it's at, where it's going to be, and just overall the product itself. It's been included on every Blue Ocean document page, included the index, and is thanks to my working with Mark, we've made sure to place it above the fold so that it doesn't hop high, get hidden when you go to any of the pages. Now, the nice thing is with the status, it's also been updated to include conditional statements. So that depending on what page is being viewed, you'll get different versions of the status update in the statement. So it's all based on what functions of Blue Ocean are being discussed. So here in creating a pipeline, it talks about all three pieces of it, Blue Ocean itself, overall pipeline visualizations, and the pipeline snippet generator, syntax snippet generator. So, but if we go to something like the dashboard, we're not going to get those things pipeline visualization isn't necessarily a part of this. Same thing with the activity view, but we're going to the pipeline editor and we see the pipeline syntax snippet generator piece here as well. So it's been implemented really nicely, and everything's been aligned in that sense. So hopefully this helps relieve a lot of the concern with the Blue Ocean documentations, these have that has come up. And I'm still working on the Blue Ocean documentation overall to get these pages more in line with the status statement. I've submitted a couple, but I still have plenty of work to do on this. So that's coming down the pipeline as well. Mark, is there any other, would you like to make any other comments or insight on that? No, I was, well, I take it back. Yes, one item. I was proud to see a developer in the community quoting from the page in a mention in an answer to a bug report on JIRA. Somebody had submitted an enhanced request, hey, give me this in Blue Ocean. And the responder said, appreciate it. Thank you for the response. Refer to our comment on Blue Ocean. It won't, it is not likely to be implemented unless you implement it. Awesome. Already getting some traction with it. That's fantastic. Right. So that was very, very encouraging. I mean, that some people are reading the documentation and remembering what's written inside. That's amazing. Well, good news. Completely unexpected. Completely and totally unexpected. Absolutely. Very nice. And then so Mark, do you want to touch base on these search improvements for Jenkins.io item? Yes. So just to give a, give a brief status update, we use docu-search by Algolia and docu-search by Algolia has been through an upgrade recently and we haven't adapted to the upgrade. And as such, our search quality has gone down. So when I'm searching for something in using the search field on Jenkins.io, it sometimes gives me much worse results than it used to. And that's because we need to do this upgrade. But as far as I can tell, it needs to be either me or Gavin Mogan that do it, because it's a privileged operation that has to be done to configure the Algolia site that does the search engine generation for us. So it's, it's something we have to access. It's not something just anybody can do. So I guess, Kevin, we probably ought to put it on my action item list. Or it's, it's already there. It's in the GitHub issue at the very bottom. So no need. That's great. Okay, great. Yeah. And yeah, and I want to be able to, I'll help whatever I can do to like add any documentation in or if there needs to be new things added to make sure the search results are hitting more than happy to step in and take care of all that. Okay. So the next base LTS baseline is going to require Java 11 for the September base, the September LTS baseline is likely going to be 2.361. There has been a thread started in the Jenkins developers group. So that's there. And we have, there's already conversation going around that. The next LTS is also going to support Java 17. So that'll be a new thing coming out that people want to be aware of and find out the upgrade guide and change log content creation and gathering will start soon enough, since that will be part of my ongoing work for the next LTS. And as soon as those requests start coming in, and we'll start putting that together. One of the other things that's come up recently in our docs ops hours is the commercial support page idea that Gavin Mogan's proposed. The idea is that we have an updated version of our support site because right now our commercial support sites out of date and it doesn't offer very many relevant items. So there's been a lot of discussion between members of the community, Gavin, Mark, myself, Daniel back and lots of others that we want to figure out what's the best way to go about implementing this page, what kind of information we can put on this page, what things are going to be helpful, what extra items that we might be able to include on the page. There's been mentions of cloud services since it might not be a direct vendor, but it's something we work with. So there's a lot that can be applied here. The idea and obviously we want as much community involvement and feedback as possible. This is something that's going to be beneficial to the community as a whole. So it only makes more sense to have as much input on it as possible. It's definitely still a work in progress. This is not something that's going to be finished up in the next week or two, but as long as we can keep pushing forward on it and getting better feedback and more info, we can continue to build that vendor site and make sure that it looks great and then has things like direct links to support and other really helpful and useful necessary items that I just started missing right now. Is there anyone who has any other comments or feedback on the commercial support vendors idea? Anything? I mean the ticket is linked here in an agenda so it's always accessible. I can post it in the Gitter Channel as well afterwards so that it's readily visible. But okay. And then Mark, do you want to just touch base on change log entries, multiple repositories items? Yeah, I haven't done the ask to the developer list yet. I think what we want to do is I'm going to create a ticket in the backlog somewhere that says, hey, extend it for this. The idea is still somewhat nebulous. It's infrequent enough that I'm not sure we want to do it always and the interface is complicated. It's easy when you see a change in Jenkins Core. You know which version it's associated with because it's always bracketed by a tag. However, with the packaging, you don't know that. We don't tag the packaging. We don't tag other tooling with Jenkins specific release for tags. And so the whole what would we say and how would we say it is not as clear to me? Makes sense. And that actually kind of leads into the next item on our list, the 2.346.3 change log an upgrade guide itself. So that's been opened up and ready to go. That's been added to the LTS checklist that is currently open for 2.346.3. We've had a couple of backports get pushed through and approved in the last week or two. And those have all been added as well. So it's now got everything. It should have everything ready to go for the release next week. And there were updates from a few different places such as Jenkins Core and then the Remoting Update came through. So yeah, there's definitely a chance that multiple change log entries can come from multiple places. But as long as we can get them into one place, that shouldn't take care of everything. And then lastly, Mark, do you want to just briefly talk to the tooling updates for Java 11? Yeah. So while Veehan is here, Veehan, as far as I understand it, the Pipeline Steps dock generator is now running with Java 11. Is that your understanding as well or have I misunderstood? No, it's still on 8 actually. So we changed for EMU. We changed for the metadata you did so on 11, but this one is still on 8. And it was one of the tasks on my database to get it to 11 as soon as possible. Okay. So Kevin, if you can update that, it's not a crisis that we must do it. It's just that it will be good for us to get there. And on that second line down, the extension indexer, so in the Jenkins documentation on jenkit.io, there are these things called extension points. And the extension points are extracted from the source code. And as part of the finding and fixing a bug in Jenkins 2.361, I realized that that extension indexer is badly out of date. Whereas Veehan's work has already updated the Pipeline Steps dock generator to use modern tooling. This extension indexer is, well, it didn't even compile with Java 11. It was that out of date. So at least now with this change, it compiles with Java 11. However, there are a whole bunch of failures that need to be analyzed to see is that a safe change given the current state of the code base? And if not, what could we do to make it more modern and still be safe? And I don't know when I'll get to that. I started it because it was of interest, but I'm not sure I'm going to finish it because I'm not persuaded that I can take the time to do the analysis yet. So this is one where if somebody wants to do a little bit of Java coding, they're welcome to. And that's it for me. Thank you very much, Mark. Are there any other items, topics, or points that anyone wants to bring up before we end the recording for this session? Yes, that was one thing that I wanted to add. That was like, do we need to make changes to the POM, Jenkins version in the POM mark for the Pipeline Steps documentation to see the new change? The newer version, do we have to manually add it? So I don't know for sure. I think that in order, so what the Pipeline Steps doc generator right now does is every week it receives a new dependabot generated pull request that offers to upgrade its dependency from last weekly to current weekly. But I don't know if that's what you're asking. Is that the question you're asking or were you asking something different? Yes, so basically I want to say that once we want to run the job again for the steps documentation, will we need to upgrade the Jenkins version that it uses? So currently I'm seeing 2.360. So will we need to update that? Is this still the buggy version is what I'm asking? Ah, okay. And that part I thought that so let me go check that. So Kevin, I'm going to give you a URL in the chat. If you can open it that way, we're all looking at the same thing together. So if you can open up that URL that I just put in the chat. Okay, so this is the Pipeline Steps doc generator. And Kevin, if you'll pick one of those pull requests 196 or yeah, so now click the GitHub link there on the left hand side of the page, click that GitHub link and let's see what it. Yeah, okay. So this one updated us two days ago from 361 to 362. And that's happening pretty regularly. However, that was two days and one hour ago and the last run on the, yeah, so I suspect we're going to find that rerunning it won't help. And now I'm just going to launch it to try. Right. This is the doubt that I had. Because, oh, go ahead. The older version does not change. Right. So I can't tell for sure. Well, I guess I can tell it's easy to analyze. So it the last job ran on my clock at 1122 am on the second of August. And the pull request last merge was 1105. So the master branch ran after it. So I would expect that the job that I just started on the master branch is not going to do anything different than we already have. But it's an easy thing to check. And if they are not different, I'll submit the ticket and then Veehan will ask you to take a look at it. Does that work okay for you, Veehan? Right. So what is the latest version that will not give us, that is that does not have the bugs? The latest version is 2.362. And it resolved the problem. So the root problem that I saw in the back end extension index generator was that the source code was not available for Jenkins 2.361 in the Maven repository archive. And because the source code was not available, it failed to do the generation. We fixed that in time for 2.362. So the source code is available for 2.362 in the repository. And if that had been at the root of this change to map things to Jenkins Core, then that would be fixed. But I'm not sure that that's at the root of it. So now it's, maybe the best answer is, Veehan, could you paste a link to that page that's broken into our notes? I think it was the checkout page. Is that right? That was the Jenkins Core. I'll just add it just a second. Okay. So should I add it here? Ah, okay. I see it. Yeah, that's okay. That's great. So and I, and now I can see it as well. Okay. So on that, it has the SCM object. Okay. But what you, the break, that's not the SCM object I think is reasonable. But when you search for checkout, it no longer shows, get SCM, right? So Kevin, if you'll, if you'll. The problem is it should be present in the pipeline, SCM steps are not full. So it's not able to find its parent. Right. So Kevin, click Pipeline Steps Reference on the left-hand side. And in the filter, type the word checkout. And my recollection behind was that on this one, there would be a fourth entry, which was for get SCM or for the get plugin. And that fourth entry for the get plugin is missing. Did I, or for something, there was, there was something that there's a fourth entry here that's no longer there that in the last time we demonstrated this two or three weeks ago, there was another entry here that was better than that Jenkins core thing. Right, right. That is correct. There were, there were four matching for checkout. I think that is, that's correct. Okay. So, so that's the regression is, is this thing that says Jenkins core isn't actually helping us as, or at least it's, it seems to have broken many other things. We need to be, get back to what we were previously. Great. Thank you. So, because that job on ci.jenkins.io has a history, we can actually look at the old generations and see when the change happened. Right. And I think what I can do is I can give you the logs of the, the build that ran after the depot depot for request. So one that we saw the latest one. So maybe some things in the logs that can help us. Ah, very good. Okay. Super. All right. So thanks very much that that covered all the topics I had with that one. Thanks Kevin for letting us take that time. Yeah. Thank you for creating those a wonderful discussion around those things. It's nice to have for posterity. And with that now, does anyone else have anything else to add or okay, we are a little over time. So I'd like to respect everyone's day and give that time back to them. The video, we're going to stop the video and it'll be available in