[ci skip] Clarify 5.2.4.1 Changelog entry #41523
Merged
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
It seems that the changes in 5.2.4.1 have led to a number of discussions on commits, issues and pull requests. Clarifying the Changelog entry seems like the most direct way to help people apply the security patch smoothly.
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Summary
Adds a note to the Changelog entry for the 5.2.4.1 release, warning of a couple of breaking changes that occurred around session ids as a result of the security patch.
Other Information
While I think the origins of the change lie in
rackand I am very grateful for the security patch having been released, having just deployed a buggy release after updating a rails 5.2 app (in part due to that app not testing the return type ofsession.id) I hope this can help others avoid the same fate.Note that I have not been directly affected by the breaking change for ruby 2.2 users, but I've attempted to pinpoint the exact use case that will run into the problem.