Thanks to visit codestin.com
Credit goes to github.com

Skip to content

Change label for CSP setup to be less ambiguous#26198

Merged
MarkEWaite merged 2 commits into
jenkinsci:masterfrom
daniel-beck:clearer-label
Jan 29, 2026
Merged

Change label for CSP setup to be less ambiguous#26198
MarkEWaite merged 2 commits into
jenkinsci:masterfrom
daniel-beck:clearer-label

Conversation

@daniel-beck
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@daniel-beck daniel-beck commented Jan 26, 2026

Fixes #26197

Testing done

With -Djenkins.security.csp.impl.DevelopmentHeaderDecider.DISABLED=true:

Screenshot 2026-01-26 at 17 05 20

Usually I'd consider this too minor to put in the changelog, but I'd like to see it backported to LTS.

Proposed changelog entries

  • Clarify UI label when configuring Content Security Policy.

Proposed changelog category

/label rfe

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.

@comment-ops-bot comment-ops-bot Bot added the rfe For changelog: Minor enhancement. use `major-rfe` for changes to be highlighted label Jan 26, 2026
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@MarkEWaite MarkEWaite left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This PR is now ready for merge. We will merge it after approximately 24 hours if there is no negative feedback.

/label ready-for-merge

@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 26, 2026
@daniel-beck daniel-beck added the lts-candidate When fixed, this issue should be considered for backporting to the LTS line label Jan 26, 2026
@MarkEWaite MarkEWaite merged commit 84c9107 into jenkinsci:master Jan 29, 2026
17 checks passed
@daniel-beck daniel-beck deleted the clearer-label branch January 29, 2026 22:01
krisstern pushed a commit to krisstern/jenkins that referenced this pull request Mar 3, 2026
krisstern pushed a commit to krisstern/jenkins that referenced this pull request Mar 4, 2026
@MarkEWaite MarkEWaite removed the lts-candidate When fixed, this issue should be considered for backporting to the LTS line label Apr 24, 2026
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 rfe For changelog: Minor enhancement. use `major-rfe` for changes to be highlighted

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Make it clearer that clicking the button does not set up CSP

4 participants