Skip to content

Bump Jackson version to la(te)st 2.13.x, 2.13.5 #1989

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

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Apr 29, 2025

Conversation

cowtowncoder
Copy link
Contributor

@cowtowncoder cowtowncoder commented Nov 16, 2024

Would increase version further but something in the build has pretty strict check wrt binary compatibility (need to figure out how to increase baseline).

EDIT: Looks like it's org.revapi that compares compatibility, and config file would be core/revapi.json

@CtrlAltFly
Copy link

@cowtowncoder - any reason jackson is still in 2.13X versions when 2.18 is out for sometime

@cowtowncoder
Copy link
Contributor Author

@CtrlAltFly As per my note, making a bigger jump requires tons of work updating revapi configs and I am not familiar enough to do that. So I ended up submitting just a trivial patch.

I don't know of any other blocker; but if someone tried resolving build/validation problem, I'd be happy to help with any Jackson compatibility issues there might be.

@CtrlAltFly
Copy link

@cowtowncoder - i agree. going several minor versions can break things. this patch (for now) seems to be a good one to be added for release.

so a 👍🏼 for your PR to be merged!

@absurdfarce absurdfarce self-requested a review April 28, 2025 04:09
@absurdfarce
Copy link
Contributor

Kicked off a Jenkins build just to confirm that nothing goes sideways here but I'm really not expecting any problems.

I know that for the 3.x line we have to use 2.13.x since that's the last version that officially supports Java 1.6. Hypothetically we could bump the version for 4.x (since Java8 is our current baseline there) but for foundational libs (like Jackson) it's kinda nice to keep the same version on both 3.x and 4.x; that's what we've done with Netty.

Although... as I look at this now a lot of our usage stems from code we could very likely get rid of. The only major consumer that I see here that would have to stay is the cloud support stuff for DataStax Astra. Hmmmm... that's an interesting idea to explore perhaps.

@absurdfarce
Copy link
Contributor

Jenkins run looks clean, calling this good. Thanks for the version bump @cowtowncoder!

@absurdfarce absurdfarce merged commit 59d7092 into apache:4.x Apr 29, 2025
1 check failed
absurdfarce pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Apr 29, 2025
patch by Tatu Saloranta; reviewed by Bret McGuire
reference: #1989
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.

3 participants