HTML API: Introduce spacing to unlock linter in Gutenberg backport

[dmsnell]

When backporting the Tag Processor updates into Gutenberg for the 6.2 branch,
the CI job in Github rejected the backport because the linting rules differ
between the repositories.

Accepted and merged code shouldn't be rejected, but it was, and this change
is meant to unlock merging the backport.

cc: @hellofromtonya @sergeybiryukov

Trac: 58530-ticket

When backporting the Tag Processor updates into Gutenberg for the 6.2 branch,
the CI job in Github rejected the backport because the linting rules differ
between the repositories.

Accepted and merged code shouldn't be rejected, but it was, and this change
is meant to unlock merging the backport.

[Bernhard Reiter]

Setting the milestone to 6.2.3, as this is specifically for consistency with the Gutenberg plugin's WP 6.2 compatibility layer.

[Bernhard Reiter]

Ah, looks like trunk already has this change: https://core.trac.wordpress.org/browser/trunk/src/wp-includes/html-api/class-wp-html-tag-processor.php#L1933

So we really only need to apply it to the 6.2 branch.

[Bernhard Reiter]

Ah, we actually had a dedicated changeset for this in trunk: https://core.trac.wordpress.org/changeset/55674

[dmsnell]

Thanks for catching that @bernhard-reiter - I didn't know if we needed a separate ticket and patch for it. My attempt as indicating this was to mark it against 6.2

[Bernhard Reiter]

In 55925:

HTML API: Update code style so it passes when backported into Gutenberg.

This changes the indentation of a variable in class-wp-html-tag-processor.php
to satisfy both WordPress and Gutenberg linters.

Props dmsnell, zieladam, ntsekouras.
Merges [55674] to the 6.2 branch.
Fixes #58530.

[Bernhard Reiter]

Replying to dmsnell:

Thanks for catching that @bernhard-reiter - I didn't know if we needed a separate ticket and patch for it. My attempt as indicating this was to mark it against 6.2

Sorry, I only saw your message after committing.

No worries! FWIW, it would've been enough to re-open and re-use the old ticket (as done e.g. here) :)

Anyway, I ended up re-using the old commit message (and referenced the changeset in the new commit), in order to connect them as per convention :)

Committed to Core's 6.2 branch in `r55925`.

Turns out we had a dedicated changeset to fix this in trunk, so I ended up re-using that commit's message (and referencing the changeset) in order to properly connect them to each other 😊

[SergeyBiryukov]

Looks like this was addressed for trunk in [55674] / #58170, and backported to the 6.2 branch in [55925].

Closing this ticket as a duplicate, as there are no plans for 6.2.3 at this time.