Skip to content

Bump org.junit:junit-bom from 5.14.3 to 6.1.1#714

Merged
raboof merged 1 commit into
masterfrom
dependabot/maven/org.junit-junit-bom-6.1.1
Jul 19, 2026
Merged

Bump org.junit:junit-bom from 5.14.3 to 6.1.1#714
raboof merged 1 commit into
masterfrom
dependabot/maven/org.junit-junit-bom-6.1.1

Conversation

@dependabot

@dependabot dependabot Bot commented on behalf of github Jul 1, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Bumps org.junit:junit-bom from 5.14.3 to 6.1.1.

Release notes

Sourced from org.junit:junit-bom's releases.

JUnit 6.1.1 = Platform 6.1.1 + Jupiter 6.1.1 + Vintage 6.1.1

See Release Notes.

Full Changelog: junit-team/junit-framework@r6.1.0...r6.1.1

JUnit 6.1.0 = Platform 6.1.0 + Jupiter 6.1.0 + Vintage 6.1.0

See Release Notes.

New Contributors

Full Changelog: junit-team/junit-framework@r6.0.3...r6.1.0

JUnit 6.1.0-RC1 = Platform 6.1.0-RC1 + Jupiter 6.1.0-RC1 + Vintage 6.1.0-RC1

See Release Notes.

New Contributors

Full Changelog: junit-team/junit-framework@r6.1.0-M1...r6.1.0-RC1

JUnit 6.1.0-M1 = Platform 6.1.0-M1 + Jupiter 6.1.0-M1 + Vintage 6.1.0-M1

See Release Notes.

New Contributors

Full Changelog: junit-team/junit-framework@r6.0.0...r6.1.0-M1

JUnit 6.0.3 = Platform 6.0.3 + Jupiter 6.0.3 + Vintage 6.0.3

See Release Notes.

... (truncated)

Commits
  • 0d85889 Release 6.1.1
  • 0363eee Finalize 6.1.1 release notes
  • a6d540a Move entry to 6.1.1 release notes
  • 69339d5 Only pass timeout when publishing to avoid failure in nmcp plugin
  • dec2eb9 Allow excluding engines from memory cleanup mode (#5786)
  • a5f4270 Publish sha256/sha512 checksums again but filter out signature ones (#5796)
  • 8213012 Update plugin nmcp-settings to v1.6.0 (#5787)
  • d1bf847 Generate Javadoc for aggregator modules
  • d721de5 Pass --no-fonts to javadoc convention
  • d289ec6 Restore original SetSystemProperty values in a ParameterizedTest (#5720)
  • Additional commits viewable in compare view

Dependabot compatibility score

Dependabot will resolve any conflicts with this PR as long as you don't alter it yourself. You can also trigger a rebase manually by commenting @dependabot rebase.


Dependabot commands and options

You can trigger Dependabot actions by commenting on this PR:

  • @dependabot rebase will rebase this PR
  • @dependabot recreate will recreate this PR, overwriting any edits that have been made to it
  • @dependabot show <dependency name> ignore conditions will show all of the ignore conditions of the specified dependency
  • @dependabot ignore this major version will close this PR and stop Dependabot creating any more for this major version (unless you reopen the PR or upgrade to it yourself)
  • @dependabot ignore this minor version will close this PR and stop Dependabot creating any more for this minor version (unless you reopen the PR or upgrade to it yourself)
  • @dependabot ignore this dependency will close this PR and stop Dependabot creating any more for this dependency (unless you reopen the PR or upgrade to it yourself)

Bumps [org.junit:junit-bom](https://github.com/junit-team/junit-framework) from 5.14.3 to 6.1.1.
- [Release notes](https://github.com/junit-team/junit-framework/releases)
- [Commits](junit-team/junit-framework@r5.14.3...r6.1.1)

---
updated-dependencies:
- dependency-name: org.junit:junit-bom
  dependency-version: 6.1.1
  dependency-type: direct:production
  update-type: version-update:semver-major
...

Signed-off-by: dependabot[bot] <[email protected]>
@dependabot dependabot Bot added dependencies Pull requests that update a dependency file java Pull requests that update Java code labels Jul 1, 2026
@raboof
raboof merged commit d93a8cb into master Jul 19, 2026
15 checks passed
@dependabot
dependabot Bot deleted the dependabot/maven/org.junit-junit-bom-6.1.1 branch July 19, 2026 21:36
@garydgregory

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@raboof
Please revert. This will break downstream POMs

@raboof

raboof commented Jul 20, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

can't downstream components either update to 6 or override the version to stick with 5 when they update?

@garydgregory

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Almost all are on Java 8, so they all would have to override.

@raboof

raboof commented Jul 20, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

junit is a build-time dependency, and while almost all commons components still target Java 8, they're typically built on newer JVM's, aren't they?

@garydgregory

garydgregory commented Jul 20, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Hi @raboof
It doesn't matter. All builds currently allow for the build system to be the same as the target platform, in this case Java 8. Since we still want to play it safe and make sure we don't introduce any kind of incompatibility like the NIO Buffer mess with co-variant types.

@raboof

raboof commented Jul 21, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Hi @raboof It doesn't matter. All builds currently allow for the build system to be the same as the target platform, in this case Java 8. Since we still want to play it safe and make sure we don't introduce any kind of incompatibility like the NIO Buffer mess with co-variant types.

I'm aware of that Buffer issue, and indeed building on Java8 is a workaround for it. However, looking at the last few votes (both by you and Mark), AFAICT in practice we're often not building releases with Java 8 at all.

This is OK because the parent pom already has the java-9-up profile setting <maven.compiler.release>${commons.compiler.release}</maven.compiler.release>.

@garydgregory

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

It's not for us that this matters, but for downstream users like some Linux distros that require building from sources. We do have such users and it would be a surprise for them. We really don't gain anything by changing the build platform requirement and making it different from the runtime requirement. It's just confusing. At some point in the future we might need to, but this current test jar bump ain't it. When Java 8 usage gets low enough, we can jump to 11, but surveys still show significant usage.

@raboof

raboof commented Jul 21, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

This thread seems rather goalpost-moving...

It's not for us that this matters, but for downstream users like some Linux distros that require building from sources. We do have such users and it would be a surprise for them.

Which Linux distro's is that? Even the notoriously-slow Debian Stable builds with JDK 21 (https://deb.debian.org/debian/pool/main/libc/libcommons-compress-java/libcommons-compress-java_1.27.1-2.dsc, https://packages.debian.org/trixie/default-jdk), 'oldstable' is jdk17 (even 'oldoldstable' is jdk11). Gentoo (https://packages.gentoo.org/packages/dev-java/commons-compress, https://packages.gentoo.org/packages/virtual/jdk) also seems to use newer JDK's.

We really don't gain anything by changing the build platform requirement and making it different from the runtime requirement. It's just confusing.

Well, it holds us back from upgrading our build dependencies, leaving us on possibly-unsupported versions. In this case it might not be so bad (there's been pretty recent junit 5 releases), but it also disconnects us from upstream, making it effectively useless to provide feedback or contribute otherwise.

The target audience that's impacted by a difference in build platform requirements vs runtime requirements seems unlikely to be too confused, I'm sure they'll manage.

Anyway, I created #718 to go back to junit 5 for now. That said I really think we should at least reconsider our dependabot approach here (I see this has been discussed before in #707).

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

dependencies Pull requests that update a dependency file java Pull requests that update Java code

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants