bitbucket-branch-source-plugin
bitbucket-branch-source-plugin copied to clipboard
jenkinsci
Add PR naming strategy trait (#354)
This has been sitting on my PC for more than a year. Might be useful for others.
Basically it just adds a "trait" that allows pipeline admins to change the way pull request names are displayed in Jenkins. Our team found it very annoying that pull requests are simply displayed as PR-1234 instead of something resembling the originating branch name (or pull request name). Especially in build monitors it's annoying to not know what you're looking at.
To combat this problem, a new "naming strategy trait" has been added, which gives (some) control over the display names.
Resolves: https://issues.jenkins-ci.org/browse/JENKINS-55348 https://github.com/jenkinsci/bitbucket-branch-source-plugin/issues/354
I should add that we've been using this modification for about 9 months now in a project of about 100 developers. No issues so far. But our setup isn't very exotic, so no guarantees. I also don't know how this interacts with Bitbucket Cloud. We don't use it, so I haven't tried/tested it.
Your checklist for this pull request
- [x] Make sure you are requesting to pull a topic/feature/bugfix branch (right side) and not your master branch!
- [x] Ensure that the pull request title represents the desired changelog entry
- [x] Please describe what you did
- [x] Link to relevant issues in GitHub or in Jenkins JIRA
- [x] Link to relevant pull requests, esp. upstream and downstream changes
- [x] Did you provide a test-case? That demonstrates feature works or fixes the issue.
Branch rebased on upstream/master and all review comments resolved. Marking this as "ready for review".
I marked some of the javadoc as @since 2.10.0, but I don't know how this is normally determined. I don't know exactly when you guys do a minor version bump.
There shouldn't be any breaking changes here, so it doesn't warrant a major bump at least.
I wanted to open an issue just about this. Thanks for your work! Eagerly waiting for this to be merged 🚀
Work deadlines, combined with the process of trying to buy a house is leaving me with little/no time for side-projects. @bitwiseman thank you for all the feedback. I'll respond/update as soon as I have some time to dive back in to this.
Hi everybody, I just wanted to check about the current status of this pull request.
Combining this PR with https://github.com/jenkinsci/branch-api-plugin/pull/254 and implementing it there would be even better 😀
The enums in these pull requests are pretty similar:
| PullRequestNamingStrategy in https://github.com/jenkinsci/bitbucket-branch-source-plugin/pull/389 | MultiBranchProjectDisplayNamingStrategy in https://github.com/jenkinsci/branch-api-plugin/pull/254 |
|---|---|
| PR_ID: Use pull request ID (default) | RAW: Use the name as specified by the scm connector. (traditional behaviour) |
| PR_ID_TITLE: Use pull request ID and title. (experimental) | RAW_AND_OBJECT_DISPLAY_NAME: Use both the raw name and the display name from the ObjectMetadataAction (if available). |
| PR_ID_BRANCH_NAME: Use pull request ID and branch name | (not implemented) |
| PR_TITLE: Use only pull request title. (experimental) | OBJECT_DISPLAY_NAME: Use the display name (if available) sourced from the ObjectMetadataAction. |
| PR_BRANCH_NAME: Use only pull request branch name | (not implemented) |
@cobexer, when you write "combining this PR", do you mean Bitbucket Branch Source would store the PR title as-is in ObjectMetadataAction (like it already does), and the equivalents of PR_ID_BRANCH_NAME and PR_BRANCH_NAME would be added to https://github.com/jenkinsci/branch-api-plugin/pull/254?
In my comment on JENKINS-66581, I requested that Bitbucket Server Integration should likewise start adding ObjectMetadataAction. I think it would be more convenient if the naming strategies were defined just once in Branch API, rather than in each SCM integration plugin.
@cobexer, when you write "combining this PR", do you mean Bitbucket Branch Source would store the PR title as-is in ObjectMetadataAction (like it already does), and the equivalents of PR_ID_BRANCH_NAME and PR_BRANCH_NAME would be added to jenkinsci/branch-api-plugin#254?
@KalleOlaviNiemitalo Yes, I think adding additional naming strategies to the branch-api-plugin is the best approach. Both mentioned strategies are out of scope for me though.
@PayBas - What's the status of this PR? Our team is interested in implementing this into our Jenkins.
Consider this PR abandoned. It has been largely supplanted by https://github.com/jenkinsci/branch-api-plugin/pull/374
While the functionality isn't completely identical and I'd rather have more options in terms of display-name rendering, it's "good enough". Besides, in case you missed it: I haven't had time to revisit this PR in years now, and I'm no longer as active in development as I used to be. So I'm closing it.