build: Replace javax.json with jakarta.json for Jakarta EE 9+ compatibility #7336
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
boring-cyborg
bot
added
core
ElUnrast
changed the title
|
Thanks for the PR - however, it looks like I beat you to this change. I was working on something else yesterday and noticed the use of |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Description of Change
Replaced the dependency on
javax.jsonwithjakarta.jsonto ensure compatibility with Jakarta EE 9+ environments, such as Tomcat 10. This change is necessary because Jakarta EE 9+ exclusively supports thejakarta.*namespace, and applications relying onjavax.*are incompatible with these environments.This modification allows DependencyCheck to be embedded in applications (e.g., WAR files) deployed on modern Jakarta EE 9+ servers without namespace conflicts.
Related issues
Have test cases been added to cover the new functionality?
no (Existing test cases should verify that the functionality is unaffected by the namespace migration. If additional tests are required, please let me know.)