Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Don't have oldtime feature enabled by default #1241

Closed

Conversation

penguin359
Copy link

Having the oldtime feature enabled by default causes packages depending on this to fail a security audit if they leave default features on due to the dependency on time 0.1. Furthermore, the documentation on docs.rs and crates.io indicate that this is an optional and non-default feature. This PR brings the code in-sync with the documentation and also fixes a misspelling of that feature. It can still be enabled for those that need it and are able to ignore the audit.

Further background on this, it looks like this features was dropped on the main branch about a year ago, however, from what I gather, that branch will not be ready for a release any time soon so this is an interim measure until then.

As this feature pulls in a dependency on time 0.1 which fail a security
audit, it should not be included as a default feature. The corresponding
Rust advisory can be found here:

https://rustsec.org/advisories/RUSTSEC-2020-0071
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Sep 1, 2023

Codecov Report

Merging #1241 (14a1b9b) into 0.4.x (f9d231b) will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is n/a.

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##            0.4.x    #1241   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   85.83%   85.83%           
=======================================
  Files          37       37           
  Lines       13516    13516           
=======================================
  Hits        11601    11601           
  Misses       1915     1915           

📣 We’re building smart automated test selection to slash your CI/CD build times. Learn more

@djc
Copy link
Member

djc commented Sep 1, 2023

See #1095 for our current proposed solution to this.

@pitdicker pitdicker closed this Sep 1, 2023
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.

3 participants