Upgrade commons-io from 2.18.0 to 2.19.0

[JinwooHwang]

Summary

This PR upgrades the Apache Commons IO library from version 2.18.0 to 2.19.0 to incorporate the latest bug fixes and improvements.

Changes

This upgrade updates the Commons IO dependency across the entire Geode project:

Dependency Management

• build-tools/geode-dependency-management/src/main/groovy/org/apache/geode/gradle/plugins/DependencyConstraints.groovy
  • Updated commons-io.version from 2.18.0 to 2.19.0

Test Resources

Updated expected dependency versions in integration test resources to reflect the new Commons IO version:

• boms/geode-all-bom/src/test/resources/expected-pom.xml

  • Updated expected Commons IO version in generated POM

• geode-assembly/src/integrationTest/resources/assembly_content.txt

  • Updated jar filename from commons-io-2.18.0.jar to commons-io-2.19.0.jar

• geode-assembly/src/integrationTest/resources/gfsh_dependency_classpath.txt

  • Updated jar filename in gfsh classpath expectations

• geode-server-all/src/integrationTest/resources/dependency_classpath.txt

  • Updated jar filename in server-all classpath expectations

Testing

All changes have been validated:

✅ Build Tasks: ./gradlew build

• Build successful
• Javadoc generation successful
• Code formatting checks (spotlessCheck) passed
• License header checks (rat) passed
• POM validation (checkPom) passed
• Dependency resolution successful
• Static code analysis (pmdMain) passed

✅ Tests: ./gradlew test

• All unit tests passed

Compatibility

This is a minor version upgrade within the same major version (2.x), maintaining backward compatibility. Commons IO 2.19.0 includes:

• Bug fixes and performance improvements
• No breaking API changes
• Continued Java 8+ compatibility

Related

This PR follows the same pattern as previous Commons IO upgrades in the project (e.g., PR #7943).

Files Changed

• 5 files changed
• 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

For all changes, please confirm:

• Is there a JIRA ticket associated with this PR? Is it referenced in the commit message?
• Has your PR been rebased against the latest commit within the target branch (typically develop)?
• Is your initial contribution a single, squashed commit?
• Does gradlew build run cleanly?
• Have you written or updated unit tests to verify your changes?
• If adding new dependencies to the code, are these dependencies licensed in a way that is compatible for inclusion under ASF 2.0?

[raboof]

LGTM when CI agrees

[JinwooHwang]

Thank you @raboof. All checks have passed.

[JinwooHwang]

Hi @raboof. The changes are ready for merge. I appreciate your support.

[raboof]

Since I gave a "LGTM when CI agrees" above in my opinion you could've merged this yourself - or have we set up GitHub so that you can't?

Anyway, merging now :)

[JinwooHwang]

Hi @raboof.
I apologize for the confusion, and thank you for merging. I held off because I wasn’t sure if I was expected to merge after your LGTM, and I didn’t want to break any workflow rules. I’ll ask you if I am not sure, so next time we can keep things moving smoothly. I appreciate your support.