Skip to content

Conversation

@tyler-yankee
Copy link
Contributor

@tyler-yankee tyler-yankee commented Nov 22, 2025

Closes #23799.


This change is Reviewable

@tyler-yankee tyler-yankee added the release notes: none This pull request should not be mentioned in the release notes label Nov 22, 2025
Copy link
Contributor Author

@tyler-yankee tyler-yankee left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

+a:@mwoehlke-kitware for feature review, please.

Reviewable status: LGTM missing from assignee mwoehlke-kitware, needs platform reviewer assigned, needs at least two assigned reviewers

Copy link
Contributor

@mwoehlke-kitware mwoehlke-kitware left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Reviewable status: 1 unresolved discussion, LGTM missing from assignee mwoehlke-kitware, needs platform reviewer assigned, needs at least two assigned reviewers


doc/_pages/jenkins.md line 31 at r1 (raw file):

[here](https://github.com/RobotLocomotion/drake/blob/jenkins-jobs-experimental/request-jobs-experimental.txt).
Both provisioned and unprovisioned jobs are listed. A subset of this list which
excludes the jobs that normally run pre-merge (i.e., the experimental

I'm not loving this parenthetical, and it's also unclear whether it refers to the subset (i.e. the entire preceding sentence), or "the jobs that normally run pre-merge". I wonder, do we really need the parenthetical, or can we just omit it?

(Also, I think the comma after "i.e." should be omitted.)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

release notes: none This pull request should not be mentioned in the release notes

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Easier-to-use jenkins job list

2 participants