OK - well, aside from a unittest that isn't compilable, how do I vote
for this?
On Feb 20, 1:42 pm, Maven User <
[hidden email]> wrote:
> I didn't notice the changes (I forked this plugin about a month ago
> tho).
>
> I just ended up creating a checkbox that allowed the user to choose if
> they'd like the --no-merge option during polling.
>
> I'll go take a look to see tho...
>
> On Feb 20, 9:28 am, Ringo De Smet <
[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 17 February 2012 21:38, Maven User <
[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > > Hi all -
>
> > > I think we're hitting this issue:
>
> > >
https://issues.jenkins-ci.org/browse/JENKINS-12459>
> > > I'm not sure why one would ever want the "--no-merges" option.
> > > Shouldn't it be binary? There are changes - build, there aren't
> > > changes - don't build?
>
> > > Merged changes don't seem to be triggering builds....
>
> > I have closed that tickets as a duplicate of JENKINS-7594. If you read the
> > comments on this ticket, you will notice that code changes have been
> > committed to resolve this issue, but these changes haven't made it yet into
> > a plugin release. I am also waiting for such a release, so please cast your
> > vote to get a plugin release too!
>
> > Ringo
Locked
