[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FINERACT-1018?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17127596#comment-17127596
]
Michael Vorburger commented on FINERACT-1018:
---------------------------------------------
I've looked over [https://github.com/apache/fineract/pull/977/files] again,
here's the order of priority in which I would attempt upgrades:
# commons-io: 1.3.2 is *REALLY* old (ancient) - current is 2.7. [~kaze] (or
perhaps [~natashan] ?) IMHO it would be good to do at least that one rather
sooner than later... I would consider this (only) blocking a 1.4.0 release
# Junit yeah IMHO it would be nice to go from 4 to 5 (Jupiter). As far as I
know, this normally should be relatively painless?
# ehcache: 2.10.6 to current 3.8.1 could be "nice" (but not release blocking -
depends on effort)
Would you perhaps like to split this 3 up into 3 separate issues, which can be
independently schedule?
> Updated more project dependencies
> ---------------------------------
>
> Key: FINERACT-1018
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FINERACT-1018
> Project: Apache Fineract
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Affects Versions: 1.4.0
> Reporter: Yemdjih Kaze Nasser
> Priority: Critical
> Fix For: 1.4.0
>
>
> Working on FINERACT-1002, I noticed most the dependencies which were set to +
> were using deprecated artifactory. I think they were pretty harmless since
> there were not going to be updated any more. Next thing to do is to update
> the artifactory and move to the latest versions on the now migrated
> artifactory for:
> org.apache.commons:commons-io
> net.sf.ehcache:ehcache
> junit:junit(Now I'm not sure if its a good idea to move to junit-jupiter,
> maybe we should discuss more on that)
>
> FYI: @nnatarajan, [~vorburger]
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)
