Skip to content

Bump undici from ^6.24.0 to ^6.28.0 - #4084

Open
navntoft wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
navntoft/bump-undici
Open

Bump undici from ^6.24.0 to ^6.28.0#4084
navntoft wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
navntoft/bump-undici

Conversation

@navntoft

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Dependabot should have created a PR for this, but currently fails with "Dependabot has taken too long to create an update".

Releases 6.25 through 6.28 are all bugfix-only with no public API changes.

Risk assessment

  • Low risk: Changes are fully under feature flags, or have been fully tested and validated in pre-production environments and are highly observable, or are documentation or test only.

Which use cases does this change impact?

Workflow types:

  • Advanced setup - Impacts users who have custom CodeQL workflows.
  • Managed - Impacts users with dynamic workflows (Default Setup, Code Quality, ...).

Products:

  • Code Scanning - The changes impact analyses when analysis-kinds: code-scanning.
  • Code Quality - The changes impact analyses when analysis-kinds: code-quality.
  • Other first-party - The changes impact other first-party analyses.
  • Third-party analyses - The changes affect the upload-sarif action.

Environments:

  • Dotcom - Impacts CodeQL workflows on github.com and/or GitHub Enterprise Cloud with Data Residency.
  • GHES - Impacts CodeQL workflows on GitHub Enterprise Server.

How did/will you validate this change?

  • End-to-end tests - I am depending on PR checks (i.e. tests in pr-checks).

If something goes wrong after this change is released, what are the mitigation and rollback strategies?

  • Rollback - Change can only be disabled by rolling back the release or releasing a new version with a fix.

How will you know if something goes wrong after this change is released?

  • Telemetry - I rely on existing telemetry or have made changes to the telemetry.
    • Alerts - New or existing monitors will trip if something goes wrong with this change.

Are there any special considerations for merging or releasing this change?

  • No special considerations - This change can be merged at any time.

Merge / deployment checklist

  • Confirm this change is backwards compatible with existing workflows.
  • Consider adding a changelog entry for this change.
  • Confirm the readme and docs have been updated if necessary.

@github-actions github-actions Bot added the size/XS Should be very easy to review label Aug 12, 2026
@navntoft
navntoft force-pushed the navntoft/bump-undici branch from b200aa9 to 54a0846 Compare August 12, 2026 10:40
@navntoft
navntoft marked this pull request as ready for review August 12, 2026 11:50
@navntoft
navntoft requested a review from a team as a code owner August 12, 2026 11:50
Copilot AI balanced review requested due to automatic review settings August 12, 2026 11:50

Copilot AI left a comment

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.

Warning

  • Copilot's review of this pull request may be incomplete because some of the changed files are excluded by your Copilot content exclusion settings. See Excluding content from Copilot for details.

Pull request overview

Updates Undici from 6.24 to 6.28, incorporating upstream bug and security fixes without public API changes.

Changes:

  • Raises the Undici dependency and override to ^6.28.0.
  • Refreshes the lockfile and generated bundle.
Show a summary per file
File Description
package.json Updates Undici dependency constraints.
package-lock.json Locks Undici 6.28.0 with matching metadata.
lib/entry-points.js Generated artifact; excluded from review.

Review details

💡 Add a code-review agent skill or configure MCP servers for context-aware, tailored reviews. Learn more in the docs.

Files excluded by content exclusion policy (1)
  • lib/entry-points.js
  • Files reviewed: 1/3 changed files
  • Comments generated: 0
  • Review effort level: Balanced

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

Labels

size/XS Should be very easy to review

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants