Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

jackson 2.9.8 -> 2.9.9 #1269

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

jackson 2.9.8 -> 2.9.9 #1269

wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

sullis
Copy link
Contributor

@sullis sullis commented May 28, 2019

Description

Motivation and Context

Testing

Screenshots (if appropriate)

Types of changes

  • Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
  • New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)

Checklist

  • I have read the CONTRIBUTING document
  • Local run of mvn install succeeds
  • My code follows the code style of this project
  • My change requires a change to the Javadoc documentation
  • I have updated the Javadoc documentation accordingly
  • I have read the README document
  • I have added tests to cover my changes
  • All new and existing tests passed
  • A short description of the change has been added to the CHANGELOG
  • My change is to implement 1.11 parity feature and I have updated LaunchChangelog

License

  • I confirm that this pull request can be released under the Apache 2 license

@codecov-io
Copy link

Codecov Report

Merging #1269 into master will increase coverage by 0.01%.
The diff coverage is n/a.

Impacted file tree graph

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##             master    #1269      +/-   ##
============================================
+ Coverage     70.12%   70.14%   +0.01%     
  Complexity      188      188              
============================================
  Files           776      776              
  Lines         24122    24122              
  Branches       1799     1799              
============================================
+ Hits          16916    16920       +4     
+ Misses         6422     6420       -2     
+ Partials        784      782       -2
Flag Coverage Δ Complexity Δ
#unittests 70.14% <ø> (+0.01%) 188 <ø> (ø) ⬇️
Impacted Files Coverage Δ Complexity Δ
...o/netty/internal/http2/HttpOrHttp2ChannelPool.java 79.56% <0%> (+1.07%) 0% <0%> (ø) ⬇️
...nio/netty/internal/OldConnectionReaperHandler.java 90.9% <0%> (+9.09%) 0% <0%> (ø) ⬇️

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update b948ab9...fa4afaf. Read the comment docs.

Copy link
Contributor

@varunnvs92 varunnvs92 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

changes in Jackson 2.9.9 seems fine and don't have breaking changes. Approving the PR.
https://github.com/FasterXML/jackson/wiki/Jackson-Release-2.9.9

@varunnvs92
Copy link
Contributor

There was a report of v2.9.9 introducing incompatible combination of versions. This might affect customers who use those dependencies. Holding off merging for further investigation.

@candrews
Copy link

candrews commented Jun 6, 2019

IMHO, this version bump should be prioritized as it addresses a security issue, CVE-2019-12086: FasterXML/jackson-databind#2326

@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
{
"category": "core",
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

For core changes, please use 'AWS SDK for Java v2'

@Ristop
Copy link

Ristop commented Jul 12, 2019

Perhaps bump it to 2.9.9.1 to address https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2019-12814

@sullis
Copy link
Contributor Author

sullis commented Aug 22, 2019

obsolete

@sullis sullis closed this Aug 22, 2019
@sullis sullis deleted the jackson-2.9.9 branch August 22, 2019 02:54
aws-sdk-java-automation added a commit that referenced this pull request Apr 8, 2021
…8a701de02

Pull request: release <- staging/e7f06a4f-475e-4797-969e-dd68a701de02
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.

6 participants