A +1
On 07/08/18 14:33, Mark Struberg wrote:
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
