Modernise project relationship page #9461
Conversation
| @@ -0,0 +1,27 @@ | |||
| # The MIT License | |||
| # | |||
| # Bulgarian translation: Copyright (c) 2024, Tim Jacomb | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Seems out of place, this is the English file?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
whyyyy is that there, I just copied the header from that file the only one with that -.-
core/src/main/resources/jenkins/model/Jenkins/projectRelationship.jelly
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
core/src/main/resources/jenkins/model/Jenkins/projectRelationship.jelly
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
Co-authored-by: Daniel Beck <[email protected]>
timja
added
rfe
|
I liked the infix operator used on the old page because it usually denotes a causal relationship which is the case between an upstream project and downstream project. Surely the fact that GitHub uses this symbol in their compare view between upstream and downstream repositories/branches is evidence that it is sufficiently modern. |
|
Yes although it doesn't really fit with the maintained form components. I doubt this page is used much and don't think special casing it is worth it. The primary motivation for this PR is to remove the long deprecated component. |
|
/label ready-for-merge This PR is now ready for merge, after the branch is unlocked, we will merge it if there's no negative feedback. Thanks! |
comment-ops-bot
bot
added
the
ready-for-merge
This was the only usage in core of the long deprecated
f:editableComboBoxjenkins/core/src/main/resources/lib/form/editableComboBox.jelly
Line 29 in c24633c
Few more around outside of core though: https://github.com/search?q=org%3Ajenkinsci%20editableComboBox&type=code
This cleans up the styling so the page doesn't look so out of place
I don't fully understand the page and so I haven't improved the rendering of the results, but the inputs and general look and feel are improved
Before:
After:
We could possibly get rid of the help sub-page but the content seemed a bit much so I just copied some of it over to explain the page a bit.
Testing done
see screenshots above, I've also tested with missing parameters.
To setup the test environment I used an upstream and downstream project, created a file in the upstream, archived it (and enabled fingerprinting), enabled the copy artifact setting on the upstream job so that downstream could copy it and then copied the artifact in the downstream job recording the fingerprint (using copy artifact plugin)
Proposed changelog entries
Proposed upgrade guidelines
N/A
Submitter checklist
Desired reviewers
@mention
Before the changes are marked as
ready-for-merge:Maintainer checklist