Basil Crow

Hi @das7pad, do you have any interest in continuing with this PR?

The implementation looks good, and the build/tests pass, so the only question remaining in my mind is whether we actually want to do this or not.

We have an approval from @timja and a -0.1 from @Wadeck due to https://github.com/jenkinsci/jenkins/pull/6420#discussion_r854061128. I will vote -1 for the same reason as Wadeck. I feel more strongly about it...

Our general policy is to review proposed API additions along with the proposed consumers. This can help us better understand the intended use case in order to properly review the...

Needs a review from @jenkinsci-cert.

> Who’s to say that, after me fixing the conflict right now, the PR won’t remain open for another year until someone does the next conflicting change, at which point...

As far as I can tell the only pending task left on this PR is a validation of the proposed new API with a consumer. We have identified one possible...

> I can't see a way with the current API to make it work right now. Is that a use case that we would expect this API to work with?...

> Unsure Fair enough. I don't think we should move forward with this PR until we become sure one way or another. Committing to an API that doesn't necessarily satisfy...

@NotMyFault If we are not going to push this across the finish line, should we file a Jira ticket for this upgrade and add this to the exclusions list?