Partial revert of "Direct access to recursive traversal methods"

What does this MR do?

Partially reverts !59095 (merged).

We came up with a different approach in !59599 (merged).

Screenshots (strongly suggested)

Does this MR meet the acceptance criteria?

Conformity

• Does this MR need a changelog?
  • I have included a changelog entry.
  • I have not included a changelog entry because _____.
• Documentation (if required)
• Code review guidelines
• Merge request performance guidelines
• Style guides
• Database guides
• Separation of EE specific content

Availability and Testing

• Review and add/update tests for this feature/bug. Consider all test levels. See the Test Planning Process.
• Tested in all supported browsers
• Informed Infrastructure department of a default or new setting change, if applicable per definition of done

Security

If this MR contains changes to processing or storing of credentials or tokens, authorization and authentication methods and other items described in the security review guidelines:

• Label as security and @ mention @gitlab-com/gl-security/appsec
• The MR includes necessary changes to maintain consistency between UI, API, email, or other methods
• Security reports checked/validated by a reviewer from the AppSec team

changed milestone to %13.12

added backend bugperformance devopsmanage groupauthentication and authorization [DEPRECATED] labels

added databasereview pending label

added database label

	2 Warnings
	Please add a merge request type to this merge request.
	You've made some app changes, but didn't add any tests. That's OK as long as you're refactoring existing code, but please consider adding any of the tooling, ~"tooling::pipelines", ~"tooling::workflow", documentation, QA labels.

	3 Messages
	CHANGELOG missing: If you want to create a changelog entry for GitLab FOSS, run the following: bin/changelog -m 59892 "Partial revert of "Direct access to recursive traversal methods"" If you want to create a changelog entry for GitLab EE, run the following instead: bin/changelog --ee -m 59892 "Partial revert of "Direct access to recursive traversal methods"" If this merge request doesn't need a CHANGELOG entry, feel free to ignore this message.
	We are in the process of rolling out a new workflow for adding changelog entries. This new workflow uses Git commit subjects and Git trailers to generate changelogs. This new approach will soon replace the current YAML based approach. To ease the transition process, we recommend you start using both the old and new approach in parallel. This is not required at this time, but will make it easier to transition to the new approach in the future. To do so, pick the commit that should go in the changelog and add a Changelog trailer to it. For example: This is my commit's subject line This is the optional commit body. Changelog: added The value of the Changelog trailer should be one of the following: added, fixed, changed, deprecated, removed, security, performance, other. For more information, take a look at the following resources: gitlab-com/gl-infra/delivery#1564 (closed) https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/api/repositories.html#generate-changelog-data If you'd like to see the new approach in action, take a look at the commits in the Omnibus repository.
	This merge request adds or changes files that require a review from the Database team.

This merge request requires a database review. To make sure these changes are reviewed, take the following steps:

1. Ensure the merge request has database and databasereview pending labels. If the merge request modifies database files, Danger will do this for you.
2. Prepare your MR for database review according to the docs.
3. Assign and mention the database reviewer suggested by Reviewer Roulette.

The following files require a review from the Database team:

• ee/app/finders/epics_finder.rb

Reviewer roulette

Changes that require review have been detected! A merge request is normally reviewed by both a reviewer and a maintainer in its primary category (e.g. frontend or backend), and by a maintainer in all other categories.

To spread load more evenly across eligible reviewers, Danger has picked a candidate for each review slot, based on their timezone. Feel free to override these selections if you think someone else would be better-suited or use the GitLab Review Workload Dashboard to find other available reviewers.

To read more on how to use the reviewer roulette, please take a look at the Engineering workflow and code review guidelines. Please consider assigning a reviewer or maintainer who is a domain expert in the area of the merge request.

Once you've decided who will review this merge request, assign them as a reviewer! Danger does not automatically notify them for you.

Category	Reviewer	Maintainer
database	Dylan Griffith (@DylanGriffith) (UTC+10, 8 hours ahead of @ifarkas)	Tiger Watson (@tigerwnz) (UTC+12, 10 hours ahead of @ifarkas)

If needed, you can retry the danger-review job that generated this comment.

Generated by Danger

added 1 commit

• c550593f - Partial revert of "Direct access to recursive traversal methods"

Compare with previous version

@alexpooley, as discussed in !59659 (comment 555455845). Could you please review?

requested review from @alexpooley

mentioned in epic &5296 (closed)

approved this merge request

requested review from @DylanGriffith

resolved all threads

approved this merge request

enabled an automatic merge when the pipeline for 86f6cdf4 succeeds

merged

mentioned in commit 08ee202d

added workflowstaging label

added workflowcanary label and removed workflowstaging label

added workflowproduction label and removed workflowcanary label

added releasedcandidate label