Skip to content

Fix stitched note next to the Enable Tunnel checkbox#38

Merged
jochen-testingbot merged 1 commit into
masterfrom
fix-tunnel-checkbox-note
Jul 17, 2026
Merged

Fix stitched note next to the Enable Tunnel checkbox#38
jochen-testingbot merged 1 commit into
masterfrom
fix-tunnel-checkbox-note

Conversation

@jochen-testingbot

@jochen-testingbot jochen-testingbot commented Jul 17, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

What

In the freestyle Build Environment config, the "Skip this if you are using TestingBot Tunnel in your code" note was rendered as an inline <small> (inside an <f:block>) right after the Enable TestingBot Tunnel? checkbox — so it ran straight into the label with no spacing, and it duplicated the ? help icon already on the field.

Fix

  • Removed the inline note and a pointless <f:optionalBlock> wrapper; the field is now a plain <f:checkbox>.
  • Moved the hint into help-useTunnel.html (the ? icon).

Validation

mvn -DskipTests verify clean; jelly well-formed. Via hpi:run + a rendered capture: the checkbox now shows a clean label + ? icon with no stitched text, and it still binds to useTunnel (renders checked when the job has it enabled).

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • New Features

    • Simplified the TestingBot Tunnel configuration by presenting it as a single checkbox.
  • Documentation

    • Clarified that the TestingBot Tunnel does not need to be started by the wrapper when it is started manually in test code.

The freestyle Build Environment wrapper rendered a <small> note inline right
after the 'Enable TestingBot Tunnel?' checkbox label (inside an f:block), so the
text ran straight into the label with no spacing, and it duplicated the ? help
icon already on the field. Remove the inline note (and a pointless f:optionalBlock
wrapper) and fold the hint into help-useTunnel.html instead. The checkbox still
binds to useTunnel and shows its saved state.
@coderabbitai

coderabbitai Bot commented Jul 17, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Review Change Stack

No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉

ℹ️ Recent review info
⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Organization UI

Review profile: ASSERTIVE

Plan: Pro Plus

Run ID: f6760d91-3189-43a9-8388-b4208c16691f

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 4484d3d and ee1d882.

📒 Files selected for processing (2)
  • src/main/resources/testingbot/TestingBotBuildWrapper/config.jelly
  • src/main/resources/testingbot/TestingBotBuildWrapper/help-useTunnel.html

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

The pull request simplifies the useTunnel checkbox configuration and adds guidance for cases where the TestingBot Tunnel is managed directly in test code.

Changes

useTunnel UI

Layer / File(s) Summary
Simplify tunnel configuration
src/main/resources/testingbot/TestingBotBuildWrapper/config.jelly, src/main/resources/testingbot/TestingBotBuildWrapper/help-useTunnel.html
The useTunnel option is rendered unconditionally, and help text explains how to handle tunnels started manually in test code.

Estimated code review effort: 1 (Trivial) | ~2 minutes

Possibly related PRs

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 5
✅ Passed checks (5 passed)
Check name Status Explanation
Description Check ✅ Passed Check skipped - CodeRabbit’s high-level summary is enabled.
Title check ✅ Passed The title clearly matches the main UI change: fixing the note next to the Enable Tunnel checkbox.
Docstring Coverage ✅ Passed No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check.
Linked Issues check ✅ Passed Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.
Out of Scope Changes check ✅ Passed Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.

Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands.

@jochen-testingbot
jochen-testingbot merged commit aa89250 into master Jul 17, 2026
5 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant