Skip to content

[JENKINS-71047] Deprecate inline JS event handlers#8061

Merged
timja merged 5 commits intojenkinsci:masterfrom
yaroslavafenkin:deprecate-inline-handlers
Aug 15, 2025
Merged

[JENKINS-71047] Deprecate inline JS event handlers#8061
timja merged 5 commits intojenkinsci:masterfrom
yaroslavafenkin:deprecate-inline-handlers

Conversation

@yaroslavafenkin
Copy link
Contributor

@yaroslavafenkin yaroslavafenkin commented May 29, 2023

Testing done

None.

Proposed changelog entries

  • […]

Proposed upgrade guidelines

N/A

Submitter checklist

  • The Jira 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.
  • 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

@jenkinsci/core-security-review

Maintainer checklist

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

  • 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, a Jira issue must exist, be a Bug or Improvement, and be labeled as lts-candidate to be considered (see query).

<st:attribute name="value" />
<st:attribute name="id" />
<st:attribute name="onclick" />
<st:attribute name="onclick" deprecated="true">onclick handler. Deprecated; assign an ID and look up the element that way to attach event handlers.</st:attribute>
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

may be better to use class name as repeatable elements don't work properly with IDs from what I remember.

IDs are safe to use in standalone pages / configuration forms that won't be used in repeatable elements

@MarkEWaite MarkEWaite added the skip-changelog Should not be shown in the changelog label Feb 11, 2025
@github-actions github-actions bot added the unresolved-merge-conflict There is a merge conflict with the target branch. label Aug 13, 2025
@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

Please take a moment and address the merge conflicts of your pull request. Thanks!

@timja timja closed this Aug 13, 2025
@timja
Copy link
Member

timja commented Aug 13, 2025

This was resolved in another PR which addressed this more fully.

@daniel-beck
Copy link
Member

@timja

onchange="${attrs.onchange}" onkeyup="${attrs.onkeyup}"/>
remain undocumented even after #10941.

@daniel-beck daniel-beck reopened this Aug 13, 2025
@github-actions github-actions bot removed the unresolved-merge-conflict There is a merge conflict with the target branch. label Aug 13, 2025
@daniel-beck daniel-beck changed the title [JENKINS-71046][JENKINS-71047] Deprecate inline JS event handlers [JENKINS-71047] Deprecate inline JS event handlers Aug 13, 2025
@timja timja requested a review from daniel-beck August 13, 2025 14:05
Copy link
Member

@daniel-beck daniel-beck left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

conditional approval

timja and others added 2 commits August 13, 2025 17:00
Co-authored-by: Daniel Beck <1831569+daniel-beck@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Daniel Beck <1831569+daniel-beck@users.noreply.github.com>
@timja
Copy link
Member

timja commented Aug 13, 2025

/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 Aug 13, 2025
@daniel-beck daniel-beck added the squash-merge-me Unclean or useless commit history, should be merged only with squash-merge label Aug 13, 2025
Copy link

@A1exKH A1exKH left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM.

@timja timja merged commit 3bf037c into jenkinsci:master Aug 15, 2025
19 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

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 squash-merge-me Unclean or useless commit history, should be merged only with squash-merge

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants