OCPBUGS-32841: Bump go-jose indirect reference to 2.6.3 #1747
Conversation
openshift-ci-robot
added
the
jira/valid-reference
|
@ardaguclu: This pull request references Jira Issue OCPBUGS-32841, which is valid. The bug has been moved to the POST state. 3 validation(s) were run on this bug
Requesting review from QA contact: The bug has been updated to refer to the pull request using the external bug tracker. In response to this:
Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository. |
openshift-ci-robot
added
the
jira/valid-bug
openshift-ci
bot
added
the
approved
|
/retest |
1 similar comment
|
/retest |
| @@ -188,7 +188,7 @@ require ( | |||
| golang.org/x/tools v0.16.1 // indirect | |||
| google.golang.org/appengine v1.6.8 // indirect | |||
| google.golang.org/protobuf v1.31.0 // indirect | |||
| gopkg.in/go-jose/go-jose.v2 v2.6.1 // indirect | |||
| gopkg.in/go-jose/go-jose.v2 v2.6.3 // indirect | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@ingvagabund I questioned the indirect modification in here https://github.com/openshift/run-once-duration-override/pull/33/files#r1578122517. But I had a chat with containers/image maintainers (about the CVE in go-jose 2.6.1) and they suggested me to do the same in oc as they did in their repository containers/image#2339. What is your opinion about this?. Or is it better to wait the next version?.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Pinning a specific dep is better since you pull minimal changes in. Also, you are guaranteed the version does not change. On the other hand, if there's a reliable upstream dep that can pull the same go-jose version, let's go with the upstream dep. E.g. k8s. If not (e.g. in case the upstream dep changes go-jose version back), let's keep pinning go-jose directly.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Sounds good. There is no new version https://github.com/containers/image/ including the bump.
|
/retest |
|
/lgtm |
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: ardaguclu, ingvagabund The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. The pull request process is described here
Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
|
@ardaguclu: all tests passed! Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository. I understand the commands that are listed here. |
|
@ardaguclu: Jira Issue OCPBUGS-32841: All pull requests linked via external trackers have merged: Jira Issue OCPBUGS-32841 has been moved to the MODIFIED state. In response to this:
Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository. |
|
[ART PR BUILD NOTIFIER] This PR has been included in build ose-tools-container-v4.17.0-202404291910.p0.g5ffe823.assembly.stream.el9 for distgit ose-tools. |
SSIA