-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 180
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.
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
[MDEP-964] Allowlist org.glassfish:javax.json #459
Open
elharo
wants to merge
2
commits into
master
Choose a base branch
from
MDEP-964
base: master
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
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
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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
How big could this list of
hidden
default exclude be? and why this javax.json specially?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Probably less than 100 over time. Each one is an improvement.
javax.json because it's the next one I happened to stumble over when working on our own code.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We should put it in other list ... when we use it as default it will be overridden when user use own list.
Should be added always, maybe we need a new parameter like
useDefaultExcludes
or some else ...There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm not sure if we need add every dependencies which we need in a specific projects ....
In such way we will have very long list
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I don't think we will have a very long list. ChatGPT-4 has roughly 1.8 trillion parameters. In 2025 that's a long list. Here, there might be a few dozen special cases occasionally encountered, though unless someone spends a lot of time on this, we will probably include less than ten. This is a small list.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
nevermind how list is long will be lost when user add own excludes, so we should implement it in other way
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
What do you suggest? We could include a base list of dependencies we always ignore and allow the user to add to this list.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
exactly - user should have a possibility to not use default excluded list
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Do you want the user to replace the default list then, not simply append to it?
My gut is that we should not warn on anything we're not sure about, and we're never sure about dependencies like slf4j that are commonly used by reflection.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Ping. There are two incompatible ways forward here and both have been requested by different people at different times. Either would be better than the status quo so we should choose one.
Option 1: There is a non-overridable list of dependencies we never warn about when they are declared but not used. A project can append to this list but not replace it.
Option 2: There is an overridable list of dependencies we never warn about when they are declared but not used. Projects can replace the entire list.
I prefer Option 1. It's simpler, and matches what almost everyone wants in practice. It emits fewer warnings and produces less noise. It will not break anyone's build. There are fewer false posiitives.
I'm OK with Option 2 if necessary. I think anything beyond these two options adds unnecessary complexity for no real world purpose.