I suggest stage and push one at a time. Never failed me before. On Mon, Jul 4, 2016, 19:09 Tatu Saloranta <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 4, 2016 at 3:09 PM, Tatu Saloranta <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> First of all, thank you for following up on this, especially considering >> that we are (like you correctly observed) about to get 2.8.0 finalized, and >> this would be good time to resolve issues that are difficult to tackle in >> patches. >> > > ... except Sonatypes Nexus managed to mess up the release process (its GUI > claimed to only push release of jackson-annotations; did push everything > staged), so 2.8.0 of Joda is actually released. I just hate doing Maven > releases having to use tool with so little visibility to what is going on, > and with bad misleading. But I digress. > > Nonetheless if we can achieve consensus I will make changes to 2.8.1 if > need be. > > -+ Tatu +- > > >> >> I was hoping others with more date/time knowledge would chime in... >> but as is, everyone seems to be busy. >> But here's my take: >> >> >> On Mon, Jul 4, 2016 at 9:26 AM, Oumar Aziz Ouattara <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> Anyone here ? >>> I have seen quite some development on GITHUB on jackson-joda-time. So I >>> would like that this matter be discussed before the new major release, in >>> possible. >>> >>> Cordialement >>> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - >>> Oumar Aziz OUATTARA >>> Strator SAS >>> Tel: 01 49 80 77 27 >>> Mob: 06 07 62 15 81 >>> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - >>> >>> 2016-05-03 11:51 GMT+02:00 Oumar Aziz Ouattara <[email protected]>: >>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> I noticed a typo in the Use Case 4 (other that the *convert *word >>>> inserted in all cases). >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> Given my Local TZ being GMT+5 >>>>> And default settings of jackson >>>>> And the following *Local*DateTime 2000-01-01 06:00:00 >>>>> When I serialize into a Json string >>>>> Then Should I get ? >>>>> >>>>> 1. (1) {"jodaDateTime":"2000-01-01T06:00:00.000"} >>>>> 2. (2) {"jodaDateTime":"2000-01-01T01:00:00.000Z"} >>>>> 3. (3) {"jodaDateTime":"2000-01-01T06:00:00.000+05:00"} >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >> I think it should NOT be (3), as LocalDateTime should not, as per >> definition, contain timezone or offset. >> >> I suspect that (1) would be ideal. However, it seems (based on issue >> reports I have gotten) that for some reason date parsers appear to want to >> get/generate a placeholder indicator of `Z` (or even +0000, which seems >> incorrect). If so, there is the challenge of reading value back >> appropriately. >> >> Still, it seems to me that (1) would be the optimal choice here. >> >> What do you think? >> >> -+ Tatu +- >> >> >>> -- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>> Groups "jackson-dev" group. >>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>> an email to [email protected]. >>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>> >> >> -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "jackson-dev" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "jackson-dev" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
