HADOOP-19544. Upgrade to Jackson 2.18.5 #8070
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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
slfan1989
approved these changes
Nov 11, 2025
stoty
reviewed
Nov 11, 2025
| <jackson2.version>2.14.3</jackson2.version> | ||
| <jackson2.databind.version>2.14.3</jackson2.databind.version> | ||
| <jackson2.version>2.18.5</jackson2.version> | ||
| <jackson2.databind.version>2.18.5</jackson2.databind.version> |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It would be easier to use jackson-bom for version management.
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
or at least define jackson2.databind.version as ${jackson2.version} until some need to actually diverge surfaces again in future
Contributor
|
See #8074 for the jackson-bom change. |
steveloughran
approved these changes
Nov 11, 2025
Contributor
steveloughran
left a comment
steveloughran
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
+1 pending that build.
@stoty I see the BOM PR and think we can consider that separately; merge this in and then look at it.
Contributor
|
Sure, the BOM change can be done independently either before or after |
Member
Author
|
I don't know what happened to https://ci-hadoop.apache.org/job/hadoop-multibranch/job/PR-8070/1/ It looks like it failed but I'm not sure what the issue is. |
Contributor
|
I have restarted the CI job. |
|
💔 -1 overall
This message was automatically generated. |
Contributor
|
TestDelegatingSSLSocketFactory.testOpenSSL failure unrelated; #8071 fixes it. I just want a complete build there before the merge (it's already approved). |
Member
|
@pjfanning I think the patch is failing compilation can you check once |
Member
Author
|
@ayushtkn looks like this PR is affected by HADOOP-19674 I'll see if it can be fixed |
dependency-convergence issue jackson 2.18.4 Update YarnJacksonJaxbJsonProvider.java Update YarnJacksonJaxbJsonProvider.java jackson 2.18.5
Member
Author
|
I'll reopen this when the solution to https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-19746 is merged |
pjfanning
force-pushed
the
HADOOP-19544-jackson2
branch
from
4bc142b to
01bf119
Compare
Contributor
steveloughran
left a comment
steveloughran
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What do we do on a backport to branch-3.4 here? same PR is good?
| public ObjectMapper locateMapper(Class<?> type, MediaType mediaType) { | ||
| ObjectMapper mapper = super.locateMapper(type, mediaType); | ||
| configObjectMapper(mapper); | ||
| if (type == TimelineAbout.class) { |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
what triggers this? I'm worried about transitive complications.
Is there a jackson issue we could link to in the release notes to warn/explain?
Member
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I have no idea what is causing this.
Member
Author
I wouldn't aim to backport this to 3.4. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
6 participants
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 PR
HADOOP-19544 replacing #7623
How was this patch tested?
For code changes:
LICENSE,LICENSE-binary,NOTICE-binaryfiles?