Skip to content

FINERACT-2663: Fix compiler deprecation warnings in core, security, p…#6047

Open
Abhishek6122008 wants to merge 1 commit into
apache:developfrom
Abhishek6122008:fix/compiler-deprecation-warnings
Open

FINERACT-2663: Fix compiler deprecation warnings in core, security, p…#6047
Abhishek6122008 wants to merge 1 commit into
apache:developfrom
Abhishek6122008:fix/compiler-deprecation-warnings

Conversation

@Abhishek6122008

@Abhishek6122008 Abhishek6122008 commented Jun 26, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

…rovider, investor modules

Description

Describe the changes made and why they were made. (Ignore if these details are present on the associated Apache Fineract JIRA ticket.)

Checklist

Please make sure these boxes are checked before submitting your pull request - thanks!

  • Write the commit message as per our guidelines
  • Acknowledge that we will not review PRs that are not passing the build ("green") - it is your responsibility to get a proposed PR to pass the build, not primarily the project's maintainers.
  • Create/update unit or integration tests for verifying the changes made.
  • Follow our coding conventions.
  • Add required Swagger annotation and update API documentation at fineract-provider/src/main/resources/static/legacy-docs/apiLive.htm with details of any API changes
  • This PR must not be a "code dump". Large changes can be made in a branch, with assistance. Ask for help on the developer mailing list.

Your assigned reviewer(s) will follow our guidelines for code reviews.

@Abhishek6122008 Abhishek6122008 marked this pull request as draft June 27, 2026 13:52
@Abhishek6122008 Abhishek6122008 marked this pull request as ready for review June 27, 2026 23:39
@Abhishek6122008

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

@adamsaghy Sir the only failing check is PostgreSQL Tests (Shard 7 of 15), and I'm a bit confused about it, could you give some advice on what I can do from my side to avoid this check failure?

case DATETIME -> Timestamp.valueOf(s);
case TIME -> Time.valueOf(s);
case DATE -> new Date(s);
case DATE -> java.sql.Date.valueOf(s);

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

this is not equivalent...

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks for catching this. I was only replacing it because it's deprecated, but I didn't properly realize my change was stricter about the date format than the original hence yes they're not equivalent.

I looked into it more and couldn't find anywhere this parse method is actually called. And everywhere I saw real date handling, it used the yyyy-mm-dd format.

So would you prefer I:

Make it use the yyyy-MM-dd format like the rest of the codebase, or
Just remove this unused method instead?

@adamsaghy adamsaghy Jun 30, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I would leave it as it was for now... i recommend just undo it

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

got it sir will undo it

@adamsaghy

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@Abhishek6122008 You might want to squash your commits into just one ;)

@Abhishek6122008 Abhishek6122008 force-pushed the fix/compiler-deprecation-warnings branch from a389271 to 7dcf216 Compare June 30, 2026 12:51
@Abhishek6122008

Abhishek6122008 commented Jun 30, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

@Abhishek6122008 You might want to squash your commits into just one ;)

@adamsaghy Done Sir please let me know if any other changes are needed, thank you so much in taking the time to help me with this pr really appriciate it :D.

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

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants