JenkinsCI

Windows installers are now available

Good portion of Java developers use Windows, so we tend to think the opposite is true, that a good portion of Windows folks use Java. But this is not true.

As Jenkins gains traction among .NET developers, it's becoming increasingly clear that Java is very alien to them. They naturally have no idea of what a war file means, and often don't even have Java installed, and so it was just not easy enough for them to start using Jenkins.

I'm happy to report that I've finally fixed this problem with the new Windows installer. It is primarily packaged as an MSI file — a common format that seasoned Windows devs/admins are familiar with. It can, for example, be deployed remotely on a large number of servers via Active Directory remotely. Or you can just double-click it to install it interactively. It bundles JRE, so no separate Java installation is needed.

The package also contains the bootstrap setup.exe, to install .NET 2.0 runtime if it's not installed yet. Between that and JRE, it got all the dependencies covered. I tested that by installing it on a fresh Windows XP install.

So I hope this makes Jenkins more attractive to .NET and other developers who live and die by Windows.

Updated Usage Stats Available!

Updated usage statistics are now available at http://jenkins-ci.org/census This data has been scrubbed of distinguishing information as much as possible, filtered for installations we've seen at least twice a month with at least one job set up, and split up into monthly JSON files. Starting with August, we only have data on installations of version 1.368 or later - before that, reports go to the old Oracle-owned server, and we aren't able to retrieve them. So that's why you'll see a fairly hefty drop in install count, etc from July to August.

I haven't had a chance to do any analysis to speak of on the data. I intend to get the plugin usage spreadsheet updated n the next few days, but I wanted to make this data available to you all ASAP. If you come up with any interesting analysis or use of the data, please let us know!

Jenkins!

(This was sent as an email to the Hudson dev and users mailing lists after voting concluded, but I thought it'd be good to post it here as well.)

The vote is closed, and the results are in. More than half of the total votes were from ineligible voters, but the result would have been the same either way. The final result of all eligible votes is as follows: 214 votes to rename, and 14 for the status quo. You can see the individual votes hudson-jenkins-vote.

Hudson's future

First, my apologies for the lack of updates on the Hudson/Oracle situation for the last few weeks. While talks have been ongoing, the holidays have slowed things down, and we didn't want to send out information that would later turn out not to be true. We've been waiting for the talks to reach a resolution - and I believe they now have.

Since the java.net migration problems, Oracle and representatives from the Hudson community have been involved in talks on the future of the project in a number of areas. The Hudson representatives have been myself, Kohsuke Kawaguchi, and Sacha Labourey (CEO of CloudBees and Kohsuke's boss), who was brought in to help provide experience with discussions on a corporate/executive level which neither Kohsuke nor I have, with Alan Harder and R. Tyler Croy advising on the side.

These talks have in many ways been fruitful - we came to working agreements with Oracle on the project infrastructure (such as mailing lists and SCM repository location), code review policy for Hudson core, and perhaps most significantly, a governance structure for the project going forward. Some issues are not yet entirely resolved, such as questions on restrictions on third party dependency licenses. But one issue, which we feel is the most significant issue of all, one for which we now believe no resolution is possible: the rights to the name Hudson.

Oracle has told us that they have trademark applications filed in both the EU and US for Hudson, based on Hudson's creation by Kohsuke while working at Sun. The problem is that this trademark ownership gives Oracle the ability to revoke the Hudson project's right to call itself Hudson at any time, and while Oracle has made an attempt to offer some guarantees (most notably, that binary releases of Hudson, once they've been released with the name Hudson attached, will always retain the right to the name), they are not offering any binding guarantee that the Hudson project will be able to retain its use of the name in perpetuity.

Therefore, to continue using the name Hudson means ceding some of the project's independence to Oracle - if the project and its governance board opted to go in a direction Oracle disapproved of, Oracle would be able to take away the naming rights. Or, in a less dramatic scenario, Oracle could insist on certain changes to the code, infrastructure decisions, process, etc, regardless of opposition from the Hudson development community, in order to retain the rights to the name.

In short, we'd be living under a sword of Damocles, regardless of the goodwill of the individuals we've been negotiating with at Oracle - Hudson as a project would be beholden to Oracle's whims for its continued use of its own name, and we believe that's not viable.

Weekend Update with Andrew Bayer

[Ed. note Andrew was not involved in selecting this post's title - rtyler]

I wanted to give the Hudson community a quick update on the current status of the issues Tyler has discussed in the earlier posts here.

Friday afternoon, Kohsuke, CloudBees CEO Sacha Labourey and myself jumped on a conference call with Hudson contributor/Oracle employee Winston Prakash, Oracle manager Denis Tyrell and of course Ted Farrell.

We discussed a wide range of issues relating to the Hudson project, such as governance, the rights to the name Hudson, and the infrastructure hosting the Hudson project. While we didn't agree on resolutions to all issues, I feel real progress was made towards a framework that provides what the Hudson community needs while also preventing the sort of conflicts we've seen the last week or two.

More work has to be done - we'll be talking again next week, and I'm hoping we can reach agreement on the contentious issues by the end of the week.

Thanks for your patience.