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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Update to newer version of jjwt library #1727

Merged
merged 11 commits into from
Nov 9, 2023
Merged

Update to newer version of jjwt library #1727

merged 11 commits into from
Nov 9, 2023

Conversation

ihrigb
Copy link
Contributor

@ihrigb ihrigb commented Oct 16, 2023

Fixes: #1724

Description

jjwt recently introduced an incompatible change in their API. This addresses and fixes it. (see #1724)
This may leed to problems as jjwt is an optional dependency. Users would also need to update the jjwt version once they will update to a new build of the github-api.

Before submitting a PR:

  • Changes must not break binary backwards compatibility. If you are unclear on how to make the change you think is needed while maintaining backward compatibility, CONTRIBUTING.md for details.
  • Add JavaDocs and other comments explaining the behavior.
  • When adding or updating methods that fetch entities, add @link JavaDoc entries to the relevant documentation on https://docs.github.com/en/rest .
  • Add tests that cover any added or changed code. This generally requires capturing snapshot test data. See CONTRIBUTING.md for details.
  • Run mvn -D enable-ci clean install site locally. If this command doesn't succeed, your change will not pass CI.
  • Push your changes to a branch other than main. You will create your PR from that branch.

When creating a PR:

  • Fill in the "Description" above with clear summary of the changes. This includes:
    • If this PR fixes one or more issues, include "Fixes #" lines for each issue.
    • Provide links to relevant documentation on https://docs.github.com/en/rest where possible. If not including links, explain why not.
  • All lines of new code should be covered by tests as reported by code coverage. Any lines that are not covered must have PR comments explaining why they cannot be covered. For example, "Reaching this particular exception is hard and is not a particular common scenario."
  • Enable "Allow edits from maintainers".

@ihrigb ihrigb mentioned this pull request Oct 16, 2023
Closed
@bitwiseman bitwiseman changed the title Adopt code to newer version of jjwt. Update to newer version of jjwt library Oct 20, 2023
@ihrigb ihrigb marked this pull request as draft November 6, 2023 08:16
@bitwiseman
Copy link
Member

NOTE: I expect this will fail code coverage due the reflective code not being covered. I can manually override that.

ihrigb and others added 5 commits November 7, 2023 10:33
@ihrigb
Merge branch 'main' into main
deb4113
@ihrigb
Enhance documentation and add a logging statement for outdated jjwt l…
3a2db89 
…ibraries
@bitwiseman
Add testing for JWT 0.11.x to pom.xml
de68272
@bitwiseman
Restructured JwtBuilderUtil based on testing
9b02348 
When I went to run tests on the reflection code I ran into a number of
errors. A few were straighfoward fixes but not all.

The issue requiring the biggest change as that some JWT suite classes
were being loaded as the JwtBuilderUtil class was being loaded,
or at least before the buildJwt() method started executing.

I had to move the JWT calls into a nested class to delay the loading
of JWT suite classes until inside a try-catch where I could handle it
as expected.
@bitwiseman
Move some test to the slow test list
7dff4b4
@bitwiseman
Copy link
Member

bitwiseman commented Nov 8, 2023 •
edited
Loading

@ihrigb
I hope you don't mind, I went ahead and added a scenario to the build that runs tests against v0.11.x. When I did so, I found some issues with the class loading timing and figured I would go ahead and address them. Your excellent work is still there, I just had to move things around. Take a look at the new structure and comments and tell me if they make sense.

@codecov Codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Nov 8, 2023 •
edited
Loading

Codecov Report

Attention: 5 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Files Coverage Δ
.../github/extras/authorization/JWTTokenProvider.java 87.50% <100.00%> (-1.69%) ⬇️
...ke/github/extras/authorization/JwtBuilderUtil.java 89.36% <89.36%> (ø)

📢 Thoughts on this report? Let us know!

@ihrigb ihrigb marked this pull request as ready for review November 9, 2023 07:41
@ihrigb
Copy link
Contributor Author

ihrigb commented Nov 9, 2023

@bitwiseman I don't mind at all. Thanks for the testing effort. I marked the PR ready.

@bitwiseman
Convert JWTBuildImpl to instances
ef87bb7 
This makes it so we only need to check once for which implementation to use.
@bitwiseman bitwiseman merged commit 17af7e6 into hub4j:main Nov 9, 2023
10 checks passed
@jglick jglick mentioned this pull request Apr 5, 2024
Merged
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@bitwiseman bitwiseman bitwiseman left review comments

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Incompatibility with the latest version of jjwt
2 participants
@ihrigb @bitwiseman