Copy PGP signature to get.jenkins.io

[MarkEWaite]

Copy PGP signature of war file to get.jenkins.io

Fixes jenkins-infra/helpdesk#4055

Since get.jenkins.io already includes the SHA-256 checksum file for the war file and it is copied to two destinations in this script, it seems like a good place to copy the ASCII-armored PGP signatures for the war at the same time.

The sha256 file shows that the file downloaded by the user is the same file that was uploaded.

The asc file shows that the uploaded file was signed by the Jenkins PGP signing key.

Testing done

Confirmed that the 2.456 asc matches the war file with:

$ wget https://pkg.jenkins.io/debian-stable/jenkins.io-2023.key
$ gpg --import jenkins.io-2023.key
$ wget https://get.jenkins.io/war/2.456/jenkins.war
$ wget https://repo.jenkins-ci.org/artifactory/releases/org/jenkins-ci/main/jenkins-war/2.456/jenkins-war-2.456.war.asc
$ mv jenkins-war-2.456.war.asc jenkins.war.asc
$ gpg --verify jenkins.war.asc

Confirmed that the script changes worked as expected with the following commands:

MY_WORKDIR=$(mktemp -d)
echo My work directory is $MY_WORKDIR

AGENT_WORKDIR=${MY_WORKDIR}/agent-workdir
SRCDIR=${MY_WORKDIR}/src-dir
WARDIR=${MY_WORKDIR}/dest-war-dir
WAR_WEBDIR=${MY_WORKDIR}/dest-war-webdir
export AGENT_WORKDIR SRCDIR WARDIR WAR_WEBDIR
mkdir -p ${AGENT_WORKDIR} ${SRCDIR} ${WARDIR} ${WAR_WEBDIR}

ARTIFACTNAME=jenkins
BASE=$(pwd)
SSH_OPTS=
VERSION=2.456
WAR=${SRCDIR}/jenkins.war
WAR_SHASUM=${SRCDIR}/jenkins.war.sha256
export ARTIFACTNAME BASE VERSION SSH_OPTS WAR WAR_SHASUM

PKGSERVER=localhost
export PKGSERVER

(cd $SRCDIR && wget https://get.jenkins.io/war/${VERSION}/jenkins.war)
(cd $SRCDIR && wget https://get.jenkins.io/war/${VERSION}/jenkins.war.sha256)
(cd $SRCDIR && wget https://repo.jenkins-ci.org/artifactory/releases/org/jenkins-ci/main/jenkins-war/${VERSION}/jenkins-war-${VERSION}.war.asc && mv jenkins-war-${VERSION}.war.asc jenkins.war.asc)

echo "WARDIR contents before publish:" && ls ${WARDIR}
echo
bash -v war/publish/publish.sh
echo "WARDIR contents after publish:" && ls ${WARDIR}/
echo "WARDIR/VERSION contents after publish:" && ls ${WARDIR}/${VERSION}/

Submitter checklist

Preview Give feedback

1. Make sure you are opening from a topic/feature/bugfix branch (right side) and not your main branch!
2. Ensure that the pull request title represents the desired changelog entry
3. Please describe what you did
4. Link to relevant issues in GitHub or Jira
5. Link to relevant pull requests, esp. upstream and downstream changes

[basil]

Have you verified the two callers (https://github.com/jenkinsci/packaging/blob/0f615197fb8721509f673f8d7d60d91d073e639e/prep.sh and the corresponding code in jenkins-infra/release pending

packaging/prep.sh

Lines 5 to 9 in 0f61519

	# TODO jenkins-infra/release performs similar preparatory actions: downloading
	# the WAR and importing the GPG key. A common interface for the preparatory
	# actions should be designed that meets the needs of both local testing and
	# releases, ideally implemented in the Makefile. Then both this repository and
	# jenkins-infra/release should be refactored to consume the new functionality.

) are passing in the .asc file as input to this script?

[MarkEWaite]

Have you verified the two callers

I attempted to verify the utils/release.bash caller by downloading the 2.456 console output from the release job. It includes the following output lines:

[2024-04-30T13:16:35.006Z] + : latest
[2024-04-30T13:16:35.006Z] + : /home/jenkins/agent/workspace/core_package_master/release/war/target/jenkins.war
[2024-04-30T13:16:35.006Z] + : /home/jenkins/agent/workspace/core_package_master/release/war/target/jenkins.war.asc
[2024-04-30T13:16:35.007Z] + : [email protected]

I believe those lines correspond to the definition of JENKINS_VERSION, JENKINS_WAR, JENKINS_ASC, and PKGSERVER in https://github.com/jenkins-infra/release/blob/33600880649d02153e4526c8281937f22f5d3792/utils/release.bash#L554-L557

I haven't confirmed that the prep.sh script provides the .asc file. That will need to happen tomorrow or the next day.

[basil]

But those lines you referenced are executed by the release job in the release repository, not the package job in the release repository. The release job in the release repository does indeed build the .war and .war.asc file, and uploads them to Artifactory, and even verifies the signature, but it does not invoke the publish scripts in the packaging repository.

Those publish scripts in the packaging repository (which you are modifying in this PR to require a new input) are rather invoked by the package job in the release repository. And since that job didn't just run Maven, it has to download all the inputs to the publish scripts in the packaging repository before invoking them, which is done in https://github.com/jenkins-infra/release/blob/b71d70d7996c85662a24358d0270b671d652e594/Jenkinsfile.d/core/package#L153-L163. So you are mistaken about the entrypoint from the release repository.

The actual entrypoint, like the one in the packaging repository itself, uses jv to download only the .war file, not the .war.asc file. This PR makes the publish scripts in the packaging repository require both a .war file and a .war.asc file, without updating either entrypoint to provide that file. Thus, if this PR was merged, the next release would fail.

For the above reason, my blocking review remains.

[basil]

Suggested solution is to replace the call to jv with two calls to wget (one to download the .war file from https://repo.jenkins-ci.org/releases/org/jenkins-ci/main/jenkins-war/ and one to download the .war.asc file from https://repo.jenkins-ci.org/releases/org/jenkins-ci/main/jenkins-war/). This would need to be done in both places where we are currently invoking jv: from the package job in the release repository, and from prep.sh in the packaging repository.

As an alternative strategy, a prerequisite refactoring could be first performed to factor the jv invocation into a single Makefile target in the packaging repository, invoked by both prep.sh and the package job in the release repository. With that prerequisite refactoring out of the way, the conversion from jv into two wget calls only needs to happen a single time, rather than two times, and this task becomes easier.

However, since the duplicate code already exists today, I wouldn't insist on that refactoring as part of my blocking review. It would certainly suffice to change the duplicate code in both places, and postpone the refactoring to a future time.

[MarkEWaite]

As an alternative strategy, a prerequisite refactoring could be first performed to factor the jv invocation into a single Makefile target in the packaging repository, invoked by both prep.sh and the package job in the release repository. With that prerequisite refactoring out of the way, the conversion from jv into two wget calls only needs to happen a single time, rather than two times, and this task becomes easier.

I like that approach. I'll plan to implement that approach.

[basil]

Per the maintainer documentation I am applying the stalled label to this pull request, as it has remained inactive for a month.