Folks, probably it's easier to push hard for a first TomEE8 release? Things like the JsonbProvider will fall into place quite naturally.
We just have to be clear about how we name that baby. So far we have 2 options on the table: A.) Go 8.0.0, 8.0.1, etc now and openly declaring that we address JavaEE8 but are not certified. Plus release 8.1.0 one JakartaEE8 TCK is available and we pass it. B.) Go 8.0.0-M1, M2, etc. And do a 8.0.0 once we pass the JakartaEE8 TCK. Note that this will mean that we will see a good year without any proper non-M release. And this might hurt adoption. LieGrue, strub > Am 02.08.2018 um 17:59 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibu...@gmail.com>: > > if we want to provide a flag yes but since we'll break as much not > providing the lib (it is as hard to set the flag than to add a lib) and > since staying small and minimalistic always has been something very core of > TomEE I start to think we should just drop it and well document that. > > Romain Manni-Bucau > @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog > <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog > <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <https://github.com/rmannibucau> | > LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book > <https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance> > > > Le jeu. 2 août 2018 à 17:52, Roberto Cortez <radcor...@yahoo.com.invalid> a > écrit : > >> If we want to have a flag that allows the user to return to the old >> provider, don't we need to keep johnson-jaxrs? >> I'm in favour of adding a simple flag that switches between old / new. >> Something like openejb.jaxrs.legacy.providers = true / false. >> On Thursday, August 2, 2018, 4:42:13 PM GMT+1, Romain Manni-Bucau < >> rmannibu...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Sure, the target is quite clear I think, but we should mitigate the side >> effect for our users, this is why a flag can be worth it. >> That said we can drop johnzon-jaxrs going to johnzon-jsonb so not sure it >> will be better than when we dropped jettison. Only positive thing is the >> default serialization will not change, only API is different if it was set >> explicitly (@JsonbProperty or so). >> >> Romain Manni-Bucau >> @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog >> <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog >> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github < >> https://github.com/rmannibucau> | >> LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book >> < >> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance >>> >> >> >> Le jeu. 2 août 2018 à 17:37, Roberto Cortez <radcor...@yahoo.com.invalid> >> a >> écrit : >> >>> >>> Maybe we need some more opinions. I don't know how strong is the >>> integration between json-b and jax-rs in EE8, but I would expect for >>> response objects annotated with jsonb annotations to be respected and >> have >>> this working OOTB in the standard server without additional >> configuration. >>> I wonder if we should write an hybrid provider that would use the Jsonb >>> one if the response object finds Jsonb annotations and if not fallback to >>> the TomEE 7 one? On Thursday, August 2, 2018, 4:31:41 PM GMT+1, Romain >>> Manni-Bucau <rmannibu...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> Yep, or we just do it OOTB for the MP distro in a first step. >>> I don't have any strong opinion since in all cases we'll break some users >>> :(. >>> >>> Romain Manni-Bucau >>> @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog >>> <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog >>> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github < >>> https://github.com/rmannibucau> | >>> LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book >>> < >>> >> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance >>>> >>> >>> >>> Le jeu. 2 août 2018 à 17:26, Roberto Cortez <radcor...@yahoo.com.invalid >>> >>> a >>> écrit : >>> >>>> I understand. >>>> I think we need to do it, since I've found a couple of issues with the >> MP >>>> TCK using models with Jsonb annotations that were not being applied due >>> to >>>> the missing provider. And Jsonb is also part of EE 8, so I believe this >>>> should be the default behaviour. >>>> To return to the old behaviour, we could have instructions to setup the >>>> old provider via system.properties, right? Via cxf.jaxrs.providers? >>>> On Thursday, August 2, 2018, 3:47:48 PM GMT+1, Romain Manni-Bucau < >>>> rmannibu...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi Roberto, >>>> >>>> You can't get this one and the old johnzon mapper at the same time >> (both >>>> will conflict). >>>> I'm all for migrating to jsonb but note it will break end users of >> TomEE >>> 7 >>>> so we should IMHO ensure the way to configure back to the old behavior >>>> globally (without modifying the app) is well documented on the jaxrs >>> mapper >>>> page. >>>> >>>> Romain Manni-Bucau >>>> @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog >>>> <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog >>>> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github < >>>> https://github.com/rmannibucau> | >>>> LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book >>>> < >>>> >>> >> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Le jeu. 2 août 2018 à 16:16, Roberto Cortez >> <radcor...@yahoo.com.invalid >>>> >>>> a >>>> écrit : >>>> >>>>> Hi, >>>>> I was wondering if it will be ok to add the Johnzon Jsonb Provider to >>> the >>>>> default providers list? The dependency is already in the project, it >>> was >>>>> just commented out with a "java 8 only". I guess this was pre TomEE >> 8. >>>>> If this is ok, here is a PR that uncomments the dependency and add >> the >>>>> org.apache.johnzon.jaxrs.jsonb.jaxrs.JsonbJaxrsProvider in the >>> providers >>>>> list. >>>>> Cheers,Roberto
