Skip to content

Conversation

@timja
Copy link
Member

@timja timja commented Jan 17, 2026

Used while writing jenkinsci/credentials-plugin#992
Logging in here was really hard to find what was going on, may as well file it in case its useful later

Fixes #

Testing done

Screenshots (UI changes only)

Before

After

Proposed changelog entries

  • human-readable text

Proposed changelog category

/label skip-changelog

Proposed upgrade guidelines

N/A

Submitter checklist

  • The issue, if it exists, is well-described.
  • The changelog entries and upgrade guidelines are appropriate for the audience affected by the change (users or developers, depending on the change) and are in the imperative mood (see examples). Fill in the Proposed upgrade guidelines section only if there are breaking changes or changes that may require extra steps from users during upgrade.
  • There is automated testing or an explanation as to why this change has no tests.
  • New public classes, fields, and methods are annotated with @Restricted or have @since TODO Javadocs, as appropriate.
  • New deprecations are annotated with @Deprecated(since = "TODO") or @Deprecated(forRemoval = true, since = "TODO"), if applicable.
  • UI changes do not introduce regressions when enforcing the current default rules of Content Security Policy Plugin. In particular, new or substantially changed JavaScript is not defined inline and does not call eval to ease future introduction of Content Security Policy (CSP) directives (see documentation).
  • For dependency updates, there are links to external changelogs and, if possible, full differentials.
  • For new APIs and extension points, there is a link to at least one consumer.

Desired reviewers

@mention

Before the changes are marked as ready-for-merge:

Maintainer checklist

  • There are at least two (2) approvals for the pull request and no outstanding requests for change.
  • Conversations in the pull request are over, or it is explicit that a reviewer is not blocking the change.
  • Changelog entries in the pull request title and/or Proposed changelog entries are accurate, human-readable, and in the imperative mood.
  • Proper changelog labels are set so that the changelog can be generated automatically.
  • If the change needs additional upgrade steps from users, the upgrade-guide-needed label is set and there is a Proposed upgrade guidelines section in the pull request title (see example).
  • If it would make sense to backport the change to LTS, be a Bug or Improvement, and either the issue or pull request must be labeled as lts-candidate to be considered.

@timja timja requested a review from a team January 17, 2026 08:35
@comment-ops-bot comment-ops-bot bot added the skip-changelog Should not be shown in the changelog label Jan 17, 2026
@timja
Copy link
Member Author

timja commented Jan 17, 2026

/label ready-for-merge


This PR is now ready for merge, after ~24 hours, we will merge it if there's no negative feedback.

Thanks!

@comment-ops-bot comment-ops-bot bot added the ready-for-merge The PR is ready to go, and it will be merged soon if there is no negative feedback label Jan 17, 2026
@MarkEWaite MarkEWaite added ath-successful This PR has successfully passed the full acceptance-test-harness suite pct-successful This PR has successfully passed the full plugin-compatibility-test suite labels Jan 19, 2026
@MarkEWaite MarkEWaite merged commit fdd619e into jenkinsci:master Jan 19, 2026
19 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

ath-successful This PR has successfully passed the full acceptance-test-harness suite pct-successful This PR has successfully passed the full plugin-compatibility-test suite ready-for-merge The PR is ready to go, and it will be merged soon if there is no negative feedback skip-changelog Should not be shown in the changelog

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants