What if Hudson loses its plugins?

Re:What if Hudson loses its plugins? by fierarul on Wednesday February 16, 2011 @05:56AM (#2225935)

This was as overdramatic as I have learned to expect ever since the whole fork thing started.

Hudson cannot "lose" its plugins right now because there are no signifiant API/ABI changes between the two forks.

Also, I wonder how much these plugins are actually used? I've only installed mercurial on my servers and I'm pretty sure that will continue to be supported on any fork. As for the rest, as long as they are open-source they can always be forked too.

It's getting a bit tiresome to watch this unfold -- can't the new Jenkins community just go on with their life and make their fork as good as they can? They got what they wanted -- why the constant need to somehow prove something to Oracle?

Having such a big face-less enemy is the best thing that happened to this community as it gaves them something to bond against. I'm curios what will happen when the rush is gone.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:What if Hudson loses its plugins? by buster on Wednesday February 16, 2011 @06:38AM (#2226001)

As a developer i wouldn't want to get spammed by users for a software i don't support anymore. It's only the devs unsubscribing. Nothing wrong here. Also, i think to request the removal in a public mailinglist is fine, too. As a user of one of those plugins i'd like to know what happened when i find the plugin not working anymore.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:What if Hudson loses its plugins? by ehutch79 on Wednesday February 16, 2011 @09:15AM (#2226376)

Part of it is PR. If you're getting screwed by a company, you need to make sure people know.

The grunts in the field need to have a lot to backup any claims that company x will screw their organization over. If they don't have a solid laundry list of examples, it will never get past the 'steak and strippers' sales pitch.

By making this public the could save many, many, companies from being dependent on technology that oracle has crippled.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:What if Hudson loses its plugins? by fierarul on Thursday February 17, 2011 @04:46AM (#2230404)

I don't think the answer is as simple because we don't know Oracle's side so to speak and from what I've read, I don't see where all the evil-ness is.

So, I don't know who's getting screwed here, but I'm siding with Oracle.

I wonder how would you feel to pay somebody full time for years to work on a project and then, when they leave your company, they fork the project and try their best to alienate all your users. Now, I've heard of burning bridges, but this takes it to a whole new level. If you think about it now, what exactly did Sun pay for when Kohsuke was working as an employee on Hudson? Apparently nothing.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:What if Hudson loses its plugins? by danik on Wednesday February 16, 2011 @08:06AM (#2226196)

I don't know. I mean, if you feel Oracle treated you like shit you can behave like this if you want to. To be the bigger man can be noble and all but blowing off some steam is pretty healthy.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:What if Hudson loses its plugins? by thibaut_barrere on Wednesday February 16, 2011 @08:11AM (#2226204)

It's a delayed issue: as time will go, the chances to see API changes will become more likely.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:What if Hudson loses its plugins? by fierarul on Wednesday February 16, 2011 @10:18AM (#2226650)

Yes, but it's too premature to think about it.

Even if API changes do happen popular plugins will either get patched to support both APIs or some parallel plugins will emerge.

[ Parent | on HN ]