Releases: groovy/GMavenPlus
Releases Β· groovy/GMavenPlus
4.3.1
Bugs
- Fixed an issue where the
compilegoal would fail when there were no Groovy sources to compile (#358).
Enhancements
None
Potentially breaking changes
None
Notes
Full Changelog: 4.3.0...4.3.1
4.3.0
Bugs
Enhancements
- Support toolchains for compilation, GroovyDoc, and stub generation (#349 and #356). You can also opt-in to using a forked process using the new
forkparameter.
Potentially breaking changes
None
Notes
Full Changelog: 4.2.1...4.3.0
4.2.1
Bugs
- Fix compatibility with Groovy 4.0.27 and 5.0.0-beta-1 which changed (GROOVY-11668) the signature of the GroovyDocTool constructor (#335).
Enhancements
None.
Potentially breaking changes
None.
Notes
None.
4.2.0
4.1.1
4.1.0
4.0.1
4.0.0
Bugs
None
Enhancements
- Support Java 22 and 23 (#302)
- Multiple dependency upgrades, including some that fixed CVEs
- Added a warning about using SecurityManager to prevent
System.exit()calls. JEP 411 deprecated SecurityManager in Java 17, for future removal. It is unclear what it will be replaced with for the use case of preventingSystem.exit()usages. JDK-8199704 is one possibility.
Potentially breaking changes
- Updated the required Maven version to 3.6.3 to conform to the compatibility plan (#309)
Notes
None
3.0.2
Bugs
[#280] The 3.0.1 jar was corrupt (thanks @eugene-sadovsky for reporting this!).
Enhancements
- [#279] Fix CVE-2023-42503.
Potentially breaking changes
None.
Notes
The CVE fixed were related to dependencies of the plugin. While I haven't done an analysis of whether they were exploitable (since this is a Maven plugin and not an application), it seems unlikely.
3.0.1
Bugs
- [#276] Fix that enabling
skipBytecodeCheckcauses the Groovy version to be reported as not supporting the goal (thanks for reporting this @jgenoctr!).
Enhancements
- [#264] Support targeting Java 21 bytecode (thanks @bmarwell!).
- [#253] Fix CVE-2020-8908 and CVE-2023-2976.
- Fix CVE-2023-37460 (242baa8 and 623a56f).
Potentially breaking changes
None.
Notes
The CVEs fixed were related to dependencies of the plugin. While I haven't done an analysis of whether they were exploitable (since this is a Maven plugin and not an application), it seems unlikely.