Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Artifactory outdated maven-metadata.xml for public/com/github/jnr/jnr-posix/ #4472

Open
jonesbusy opened this issue Jan 6, 2025 · 15 comments
Assignees

Comments

@jonesbusy
Copy link

jonesbusy commented Jan 6, 2025

Service(s)

Artifactory

Summary

Hi,

While investigate why dependabot didn't found a new release on https://github.com/jenkinsci/jnr-posix-api-plugin/actions/runs/12630790439/job/35191287139

Original artifact are hosted on maven central : https://repo1.maven.org/maven2/com/github/jnr/jnr-posix/

Latest release is 3.1.20. Maven metadata is correct https://repo1.maven.org/maven2/com/github/jnr/jnr-posix/maven-metadata.xml

But on our Jenkins artifactory public repo it's not https://repo.jenkins-ci.org/public/com/github/jnr/jnr-posix/maven-metadata.xml

It's still indicate 3.0.61 even if 3.1.20 was downloaded (I did a build locally, and it's resolved)

Why the maven-metadata is incorrect ?

Might be related to foreign release #4444 ?

Can we try maybe to invalidate this maven-metadata.xml ?

Thanks

Reproduction steps

No response

@jonesbusy jonesbusy added the triage Incoming issues that need review label Jan 6, 2025
@dduportal dduportal self-assigned this Jan 7, 2025
@dduportal dduportal removed the triage Incoming issues that need review label Jan 7, 2025
@dduportal dduportal added this to the infra-team-sync-2025-01-14 milestone Jan 7, 2025
@dduportal
Copy link
Contributor

dduportal commented Jan 7, 2025

After a check in Artifactory:

(Edited) The "broken" metadata most probably come from the atlassian remote repository.

@dduportal
Copy link
Contributor

Now comes the billion dollar question: why do we have this repository still there :| Gotta search our old issues

@dduportal
Copy link
Contributor

Now comes the billion dollar question: why do we have this repository still there :| Gotta search our old issues

Comes from #3950

@dduportal
Copy link
Contributor

Ping @daniel-beck @MarkEWaite @basil I can't recall the state of our setup for atlassian-maven-public-cache. I'm currently digging the old issues, but I fear I did not report with due diligence the next steps and now my memory betrays me.

Is there a path in which we want to remove this from the public/ virtual repository (which allows specific project to rely on it, but not all)?

@dduportal
Copy link
Contributor

@jonesbusy is the problem solved on your side now?

@jonesbusy
Copy link
Author

@MarkEWaite
Copy link

Ping @daniel-beck @MarkEWaite @basil I can't recall the state of our setup for atlassian-maven-public-cache. I'm currently digging the old issues, but I fear I did not report with due diligence the next steps and now my memory betrays me.

I recall that we intentionally added one or more Atlassian public caches because they provide open source components that some of our plugins require. I believe that we stopped mirroring the Atlassian caches that included more than open source components so that we would more easily detect the use of a proprietary component.

I believe more history is available at:

@jonesbusy
Copy link
Author

Do we have a way to exclude some path or define order in the virtual repository?

@dduportal
Copy link
Contributor

Do we have a way to exclude some path or define order in the virtual repository?

Absolutely, that would be the most porbable "short term" fix for the org/github/jnr/**/* tree. But if we can even stop mirroring a whole repo, or only includes what we need (yes, excludes AND includes are available)

@timja
Copy link
Member

timja commented Jan 7, 2025

Includes would be preferable here

@dduportal
Copy link
Contributor

Includes would be preferable here

Yep, but switching to include might break some projects hence my question about recollections.

naive question : do we have a technique to check dependencies across jenkinsci projects?

@jonesbusy
Copy link
Author

Includes would be preferable here

Yep, but switching to include might break some projects hence my question about recollections.

naive question : do we have a technique to check dependencies across jenkinsci projects?

I wish, perhaps one day with https://github.com/jenkins-infra/plugin-modernizer-tool

@dduportal
Copy link
Contributor

dduportal commented Jan 8, 2025

Proposal

Let's only mirrors the artifacts of atlassian-maven-public which are part of the tree com/atlassian/**/* by using include patterns.

As per #3842 (ref. #3842 (comment), #3842 (comment), #3842 (comment))

=> it restricts the mirrored artifacts but not too aggressively.

Note: it might have an impact on the crowd2 plugin though (ref. #3842 (comment)): if we agree to perform this change, then we'll have to monitor it carefully
Crowd2 is not distributed anymore as per #3854

@jonesbusy
Copy link
Author

Looks goods

@timja
Copy link
Member

timja commented Jan 8, 2025

Let's only mirrors the artifacts of atlassian-maven-public which are part of the tree com/atlassian/**/* by using include patterns.

Sounds reasonable and should fix this and the other issue #4444

We can easily add more includes if required.

cc @olamy as Jira plugin maintainer for FYI

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants