Details

    • Type: Improvement
    • Status: Resolved
    • Priority: Major
    • Resolution: Fixed
    • Affects Version/s: 1.7.1
    • Fix Version/s: 1.6.6, 1.7.3, 1.8.0
    • Component/s: None
    • Labels:
      None

      Description

      I ran into a strange issue with Gson 2.2.2 that I was using from the Accumulo lib dir. May want to bump Accumulo's gson version to 2.2.4.

        Issue Links

          Activity

          Hide
          elserj Josh Elser added a comment -

          May want to bump Accumulo's gson version to 2.2.4.

          Any idea on how Gson uses their version strings (do they actually follow something like semver)?

          Show
          elserj Josh Elser added a comment - May want to bump Accumulo's gson version to 2.2.4. Any idea on how Gson uses their version strings (do they actually follow something like semver)?
          Hide
          ctubbsii Christopher Tubbs added a comment -

          I've been using Gson 2.3.1 in Fedora for some time now with Accumulo's packaging there. I don't know what they guarantee with regard to their versioning, but newer versions don't seem to cause any issues.

          Show
          ctubbsii Christopher Tubbs added a comment - I've been using Gson 2.3.1 in Fedora for some time now with Accumulo's packaging there. I don't know what they guarantee with regard to their versioning, but newer versions don't seem to cause any issues.
          Hide
          elserj Josh Elser added a comment -

          I don't know what they guarantee with regard to their versioning, but newer versions don't seem to cause any issues.

          Gotcha. It's that weird space (again) where people might be expecting certain things to work with dependencies we bundle. I'd hope (but want to verify) that Gson 2.2.4 is actually a bug-fix release over 2.2.2. Same thing if we would move to 2.3.1 instead – just need to understand that we're not shipping wildly new code that users might unintentionally use that would change in one of our bug-fix releases.

          Show
          elserj Josh Elser added a comment - I don't know what they guarantee with regard to their versioning, but newer versions don't seem to cause any issues. Gotcha. It's that weird space (again) where people might be expecting certain things to work with dependencies we bundle. I'd hope (but want to verify) that Gson 2.2.4 is actually a bug-fix release over 2.2.2. Same thing if we would move to 2.3.1 instead – just need to understand that we're not shipping wildly new code that users might unintentionally use that would change in one of our bug-fix releases.
          Hide
          ctubbsii Christopher Tubbs added a comment -

          Yeah. I asked about versioning on the Gson Google Group, but the list is moderated, so I don't even know if my message will get seen by anybody.

          Show
          ctubbsii Christopher Tubbs added a comment - Yeah. I asked about versioning on the Gson Google Group, but the list is moderated, so I don't even know if my message will get seen by anybody.
          Hide
          elserj Josh Elser added a comment -

          lol ok.

          Just something to keep in mind whoever (if anyone) follows through on this issue. This is -1 worthy to me.

          Show
          elserj Josh Elser added a comment - lol ok. Just something to keep in mind whoever (if anyone) follows through on this issue. This is -1 worthy to me.
          Hide
          ctubbsii Christopher Tubbs added a comment -

          It looks like this was definitely a bug (see upstream bug link above) fixed by the newer version. It doesn't look like this bump would affect us much, if at all, since we're only using it for Maps in JSonServlet, and it doesn't look like Maps were affected by this bug.

          Show
          ctubbsii Christopher Tubbs added a comment - It looks like this was definitely a bug (see upstream bug link above) fixed by the newer version. It doesn't look like this bump would affect us much, if at all, since we're only using it for Maps in JSonServlet, and it doesn't look like Maps were affected by this bug.
          Hide
          ctubbsii Christopher Tubbs added a comment -

          I got a response back. In short, Gson strives to be 100% backwards compatible.

          Show
          ctubbsii Christopher Tubbs added a comment - I got a response back . In short, Gson strives to be 100% backwards compatible.
          Hide
          kturner Keith Turner added a comment -

          FWIW Hadoop 2.6.3 depends on GSon 2.2.4

          Show
          kturner Keith Turner added a comment - FWIW Hadoop 2.6.3 depends on GSon 2.2.4
          Hide
          elserj Josh Elser added a comment -

          Thanks for doing the leg-work, Christopher Tubbs!

          Show
          elserj Josh Elser added a comment - Thanks for doing the leg-work, Christopher Tubbs !

            People

            • Assignee:
              ctubbsii Christopher Tubbs
              Reporter:
              kturner Keith Turner
            • Votes:
              0 Vote for this issue
              Watchers:
              2 Start watching this issue

              Dates

              • Created:
                Updated:
                Resolved:

                Time Tracking

                Estimated:
                Original Estimate - Not Specified
                Not Specified
                Remaining:
                Remaining Estimate - 0h
                0h
                Logged:
                Time Spent - 40m
                40m

                  Development