Page MenuHomeFreeBSD

security/p5-Crypt-JWT: Update to 0.034
ClosedPublic

Authored by driesm on Nov 30 2021, 6:32 PM.
Tags
None
Referenced Files
Unknown Object (File)
Feb 18 2024, 9:59 AM
Unknown Object (File)
Feb 18 2024, 9:59 AM
Unknown Object (File)
Feb 18 2024, 9:59 AM
Unknown Object (File)
Feb 18 2024, 9:57 AM
Unknown Object (File)
Jan 17 2024, 7:26 PM
Unknown Object (File)
Dec 23 2023, 10:50 PM
Unknown Object (File)
Dec 22 2023, 10:06 PM
Unknown Object (File)
Dec 18 2023, 9:45 PM
Subscribers

Details

Summary
security/p5-Crypt-JWT: Update to 0.034

Ensure payload is serialized consistently (canonical).

 PR:			260112
 Approved by:		tbd (mentor)
 Differential Revision:	https://reviews.freebsd.org/D33201
Test Plan

Testport looks good.

Diff Detail

Repository
R11 FreeBSD ports repository
Lint
Lint Not Applicable
Unit
Tests Not Applicable

Event Timeline

driesm added reviewers: 0mp, philip.

Is this a candidate to merge quarterly? If I recall correctly, security and bug fixes can be MFC-ed to quarterly?

Approved by: philip (mentor)

Yes: this can be merged to quarterly.

This revision is now accepted and ready to land.Dec 1 2021, 2:04 AM

Do I make a seperate review for the MFH commit to 2021Q4?

No need. If you do the git cherry-pick as described in the handbook, you'll get the same commit on the quarterly branch as on main -- including the Approved by: line. :)

Great work with the MFH (MFC is for src)!

Two notes:

  1. Remember to test the build on quarterly as well. It happens surprisingly often that trivial patches break for whatever reason when MFH'ed. Although usually less so for Python ports :D
  2. If you know that you are going to MFH then you may add MFH: 2021Q4 to your commit message to let others know about your plans. It is not required (it used to be because you had to receive an approval to MFH) and it is not binding. It's a good practice.

Cheers!