Conversation
|
nice catch! |
|
@stchar What kind of help would be needed? This is an MR with changes to fix including a unit test. |
|
@Willem1987 Sorry I just thought that it is an issue not a PR =)) |
|
@Willem1987 Looks like i'm reimplementing your work in my #311 |
|
@stchar I posted a comment on #311. I feel we should treat param calls inside parameters and outside the block differently. I don't want to accidentaly overwrite parameters block if i start a downstream build with the same param name. I mostly want to temporarily log the params. But we should decide what way to go i guess. |
b1fe47b to
131cd6f
Compare
|
I updated this MR and i am still don't see what the paramInterceptor would be used for here. It should be captured by the ParametersDeclaration i feel. |
|
+1 |
|
Although I am in the context of a scripted pipeline I think I have a very similar desire/problem:
Questions (maybe also/especially to @nre-ableton):
|
…k for a build step. Add secret param method
131cd6f to
3b3754f
Compare
|
@stchar i updated this mr to the new master. |
|
@nre-ableton anything i can do to get progress pr or the propertymissing? Both issues prevent me from building tests the way id like. Id be open to further work on the prs if needed. |
|
@nre-ableton and @sams-gleb This also links with #460 -- which I think is not the perfect way, because the logic in withCredentials([string(credentialsId: 'gitlab-api-token', variable: 'GITLAB_API_TOKEN')]) { ...
|
Given the build step:
Shows up as:
build({job=start, parameters=[null], wait=true})I don't see the use for the
paramInterceptoroutside theParametersDeclaration. I would like to see the params a build is called with in the call stack.UPD: Updated formatting.