|
||||||||
|
This message is automatically generated by JIRA. If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators. For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira |
||||||||
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Jenkins Issues" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to jenkinsci-issues+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
The use case that I've used has been that I want any new branch to be built which follows a specific naming convention, without requiring that I list the name of that branch explicitly. I use a naming convention for branches with a wildcard at the end of the "Branches to build" value. That allows multiple team members to each submit their proposal on their own branch, which the Jenkins job detects and builds.
For example, when I think I'm ready to submit a change to the git-client-plugin, I submit the change to my repository on GitHub with the branch name "master-some-description-of-the-change". The job I have defined is configured to build all branches named "*/master*". I don't change the job definition, and my change is evaluated.
I've used that same technique to merge proposed changes from the submitter branch to a destination branch, and then push the destination branch when the tests are successful. I'm not willing to lose that capability.
Thanks for including the reference to JENKINS-22591. I agree with Nicolas De Loof that it should not be fixed, and that refining the branch specifier is the way to handle that case.