AdministrativeMonitorsDecorator cleanup; ManageJenkinsAction.getBadge optimization

[jglick]

#2558 introduced AdministrativeMonitorsDecorator which #5063 elaborated with AdministrativeMonitorsApi. However #10245 completely redesigned how this information is shown in all cases except for the actual /manage/ page, which continues to display the HTML blurbs of all active admin monitors. Now other pages (as viewed by an admin) merely need to show a badge if there are any admin monitors active. It did include a count, but counting them forces the isActivated method of all applicable monitors to be run on every page load, when really what we mainly care about is whether or not a badge needs to be shown (and whether it should be marked a security issue or not). So we can now actually just check whether there is at least one security monitor active; if not, whether there is at least one non-security monitor active. While isActivated was documented to need to run “fast”, this was a burden, and we may as well try to avoid checking any more monitors than we really have to, if there is already at least one monitor active.

This also cleans up a bunch of dead code left behind by #10245.

Testing done

New test coverage for laziness (failed as expected prior to change). Also various interactive tests causing three categories of monitor to be activated or not:

• security
• non-security
• reverse proxy & URI encoding, which should be ignored for purposes of the badge (they either display a chunk in /manage/ or they do not)

Proposed changelog entries

• Minor performance optimization for display of the badge for administrative monitors.

Proposed changelog category

/label rfe

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

@daniel-beck @janfaracik

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

[A1exKH]

LGTM.

[timja]

Tested locally, looks reasonable, no need for this to be precise

[timja]

should there be some javadoc to explain when to use this / why its here?

[jglick]

Well, it is for now only exposed internally, so I figure anyone curious can easily follow the overrides & reference. The prior code was not particularly illuminating either. I guess the more interesting comments would be on the implementations.

[timja]

/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!