-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2
Try to fix transitive dependency conflict issue introduced at bom consumers. #115
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
Conversation
Test Results15 files ±0 15 suites ±0 27s ⏱️ -2s Results for commit c06e7d2. ± Comparison against base commit 0aa8c44. This pull request removes 9 and adds 9 tests. Note that renamed tests count towards both.♻️ This comment has been updated with latest results. |
…nstraint lz4." This reverts commit 55b9939.
|
This pull request sets up GitHub code scanning for this repository. Once the scans have completed and the checks have passed, the analysis results for this pull request branch will appear on this overview. Once you merge this pull request, the 'Security' tab will show more code scanning analysis results (for example, for the default branch). Depending on your configuration and choice of analysis tool, future pull requests will be annotated with code scanning analysis results. For more information about GitHub code scanning, check out the documentation. |
I want to test whether the resolutionStrategy is enough to constraint lz4, and whether it can avoid the dependency conflict due to the redirect from org.lz4:lz4-java:1.8.1 to at.yawk.lz4.
Description
Please include a summary of the change, motivation and context.
Testing
Please describe the tests that you ran to verify your changes. Please summarize what did you test and what needs to be tested e.g. deployed and tested helm chart locally.
Checklist:
Documentation
Make sure that you have documented corresponding changes in this repository or hypertrace docs repo if required.