Fast incremental of commons file upload 2.0.0-M5

[MarkEWaite]

Commons file upload Fast incremental for use in ATH and BOM testing

Apache Commons File Upload 2.0.0-M5 has released with breaking changes to the API. The breaking changes have been adapted in Stapler and in Jenkins core. The changes need to be tested in BOM and in ATH. This pull request will generate an incremental build for testing.

• Update commons-fileupload2.version to v2.0.0-M5
• Adapt to method renames in Apache Commons File Upload
• Use Stapler incremental 2074.v6ff4fa_fccff7 with file upload 2.0.0-M5
• Fast incremental build

Used for testing pull requests:

• Update commons-fileupload2.version to v2.0.0-M5 #26322
• Bump commons-fileupload2.version from 2.0.0-M4 to 2.0.0-M5 stapler#754

Testing done

Tested interactively with a local build. Tested file uploading in both core (via the upload plugin feature) and two plugins (Scriptler and Sidebar Link)

Screenshots (UI changes only)

Before

After

Proposed changelog entries

• N/A

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

N/A

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.

[MarkEWaite]

Build is available. Closing the pull request