[JENKINS-62910] Table to div compatibility + Update the minimum Jenkins core requirement to 2.204.6 + Update Parent POM to a recent version

[res0nance]

Starting a draft PR first, mostly to make sure its working with CI / incrementals

[res0nance]

AFAICT I can't seem to break this, the configuration saves correctly.

CC: @fqueiruga , @timja In case you guys want to look, but I cannot seem to cause the typical issues with the latest version of Jenkins. I've updated the POM for convenience.

[timja]

AFAICT I can't seem to break this, the configuration saves correctly.

CC: @fqueiruga , @timja In case you guys want to look, but I cannot seem to cause the typical issues with the latest version of Jenkins. I've updated the POM for convenience.

only certain cases break it, normally to do with nested table tags or repeatable elements.

It's hard to tell what will break it too.

[res0nance]

AFAICT I can't seem to break this, the configuration saves correctly.
CC: @fqueiruga , @timja In case you guys want to look, but I cannot seem to cause the typical issues with the latest version of Jenkins. I've updated the POM for convenience.

only certain cases break it, normally to do with nested table tags or repeatable elements.

It's hard to tell what will break it too.

If its not going to break in this case, we should just migrate from a table to a div then. WDYT?

[timja]

AFAICT I can't seem to break this, the configuration saves correctly.
CC: @fqueiruga , @timja In case you guys want to look, but I cannot seem to cause the typical issues with the latest version of Jenkins. I've updated the POM for convenience.

only certain cases break it, normally to do with nested table tags or repeatable elements.
It's hard to tell what will break it too.

If its not going to break in this case, we should just migrate from a table to a div then. WDYT?

only if you bump the baseline to 2.265 you can do that.

[res0nance]

Confirming that there is a case where it breaks, thanks to a user for providing a reproducible example.

CC: @oleg-nenashev IIRC has permissions to release this.

[oleg-nenashev]

Yes. This issue is one of the reasons why I asked for permissions. Will review/merge shortly

[oleg-nenashev]

If there is any concern, I suggest that we cut a compatible version for 2.204 and then, if things still fail for 2.265, work on a new release for 2.265+ which switches to the new config entirely

[oleg-nenashev]

Will merge once green

[res0nance]

If there is any concern, I suggest that we cut a compatible version for 2.204 and then, if things still fail for 2.265, work on a new release for 2.265+ which switches to the new config entirely

A user reported that he tested the new version with 2.266, so I don't anticipate issues but in case there is the path forward is clear.