No real preference. I haven't done a strict comparison, but I think both are largely identical. The only difference I recall is that Jochen's is published under his own group id. On Tue, Nov 1, 2016 at 3:38 PM Tatu Saloranta <[email protected]> wrote:
> Christopher, Jochen, > > any preference on which repo I should fork or copy? I think it'd make > sense to get this under FasterXML repo for 2.9, and I might as well do > it know. > Another reorganization that I am planning to do is to merge Java8 > repos (jackson-module-parameter-names, jackson-datatype-jdk8, > jackson-datatype-jsr310) under multi-maven module repo -- simply to > make release process more efficient, but keeping modules (jars) still > separate. They will get merge into databind for 3.x, but I think 2.8 > and especially 2.9 will live quite long so there's some benefit. > > -+ Tatu +- > > On Tue, Oct 4, 2016 at 11:01 PM, Tatu Saloranta <[email protected]> > wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 4, 2016 at 10:35 PM, Christopher Currie <[email protected] > > > > wrote: > >> > >> I had not seen that, as it didn't exist last week when I looked for it. > It > >> appears mostly identical, save for plugin management for which I > borrowed > >> jackson-parent. > > > > > > Right, I assume it's just convergent evolution, solving the same problem. > > > >> > >> > >> AFAICT the release process is straightforward. I don't have an opinion > on > >> whether other jackson projects use it internally, though that would > have the > >> nice property of internally validating correctness to a certain extent. > >> > >> Happy to reparent the project under FasterXML if it ends up useful > enough. > > > > > > We could definitely test this with 2.9.0.rc1 and see how it'd fly, and > > hopefully then use for 2.9.x itself. I agree in usefulness as sort of > > canary. > > > > It could also (eventually) solve one small -- but to me, personally > annoying > > :) -- issue wrt `jackson-annotations`: it would be possible to remove > patch > > version from annotations, without making devs life more difficult. Bom > > version would be fully patch-qualified, but eventually there would just > be > > `jackson-annotations-2.9`, `jackson-annotations-3.0`, with no patch > version. > > > > -+ Tatu +- > > > > > >> > >> > >> On Tue, Oct 4, 2016 at 10:22 PM Tatu Saloranta <[email protected]> > wrote: > >>> > >>> Interestingly enough this surfaced on Twitter as well, so there's also: > >>> > >>> https://github.com/joschi/jackson-bom > >>> > >>> which I assume is about the same thing. > >>> So the idea is to usually Maven import this with scope of 'import', to > >>> get the versions from dependencyManagement? > >>> > >>> I am supportive of the idea, assuming release is as simple as just > using > >>> mvn release plugin, possibly modifying one line (or zero; but I had > some > >>> issues earlier trying to rely on ${project.version}), and could > release this > >>> as part of the usual Jackson release process. Or work with whoever > would > >>> like to maintain it, if preferable. > >>> > >>> One open question would be whether core Jackson components themselves > >>> should use this: I assume that would make sense. There may be some > minor > >>> question related to inclusion (or not) of components outside of > fasterxml, > >>> but I think bom could start incorporating more versions whenever (and > if) we > >>> figure out a way to coordinate releases of external things (like, say, > >>> bson4jackson, mongo mappers?) in some sensible way. > >>> > >>> So... what do others think? Would you find this useful? > >>> > >>> -+ Tatu +- > >>> > >>> ps. I think `jackson-parent` can still be used for versions of plugin > >>> dependencies. > >>> > >>> > >>> On Tue, Oct 4, 2016 at 7:01 PM, Christopher Currie > >>> <[email protected]> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> A couple of times recently my team has been hit by jackson project > >>>> version mismatches, as one or the other project will > 'dependencyManage' only > >>>> some modules and not others. I propose to create (and maintain, if > needed) a > >>>> 'jackson-bom' project that, similar to the 'dropwizard-bom' project, > >>>> provides dependency management across ALL jackson modules. A draft of > this > >>>> project is here: > >>>> > >>>> https://github.com/christophercurrie/jackson-bom > >>>> > >>>> Feedback is encouraged, especially if anyone else would find such a > >>>> thing valuable. > >>>> > >>>> Christopher > >>>> > >>>> -- > >>>> 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. > > > > > > -- > 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.
