Assuming that this list of where Jackson is used is correct, I would agree
that we could probably do something simpler.
* DestinationsViewFilter
* PartitionBrokerPlugin
* ZooKeeperPartitionBroker
* Partition & Target classes
* PersistenceAdapterView
There's a couple of drivers for asking for this
Do we really need a full JSON stack *in* the broker? Could we not move to some
simplified JSON writers (like what Log4j2 does)? Or model class toString() r
util method implementations that write out valid JSON?
-Matt
> On Oct 10, 2022, at 9:46 AM, Jonathan Gallimore
> wrote:
>
> Hi
>
> Are
Hi
Are there any thoughts on this (even if its a hard no, or a different view
on how it might be implemented)?
Thanks
Jon
On Tue, May 10, 2022 at 11:25 AM Jonathan Gallimore <
jonathan.gallim...@gmail.com> wrote:
> When I originally posted, my hope was that Jackson might be able to
> implement
When I originally posted, my hope was that Jackson might be able to
implement JSON-B itself. Almost a year on, that feels like it would still
be my favourite approach, but is possibly not realistic. Would the
community be open to an abstraction in ActiveMQ allowing either Jackson, or
a JSON-B imple
Thanks for the feedback - I'll look at this targeting 5.17!
Jon
On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 6:32 PM Matt Pavlovich wrote:
> +1 JSON-B using Jackson and targeting 5.17.x
>
> Given the popularity of pairing ActiveMQ w/ Camel and CXF, I think staying
> with Jackson is a good idea and would cause less
+1 JSON-B using Jackson and targeting 5.17.x
Given the popularity of pairing ActiveMQ w/ Camel and CXF, I think staying with
Jackson is a good idea and would cause less volatility.
> On Jan 28, 2021, at 5:36 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofre wrote:
>
> Hi Jon,
>
> Clearly +1 for me to go using JSON-B
Very good idea, +1 for me :)
regards,
François
fpa...@apache.org
Le 28/01/2021 à 12:36, Jean-Baptiste Onofre a écrit :
> Hi Jon,
>
> Clearly +1 for me to go using JSON-B.
>
> However, I will focus this for 5.17.x. I’m working on cleanup, update, etc
> for this version, so I think it’s the good
Hi Jon,
Clearly +1 for me to go using JSON-B.
However, I will focus this for 5.17.x. I’m working on cleanup, update, etc for
this version, so I think it’s the good timing to use JSON-B.
So, +1 to use master (5.17.x) for that. If you can wait a bit, I can merge the
first round cleanup (removing
Hi All
Just to introduce myself a little, I am one of the contributors to Apache
TomEE, and we have been embedding ActiveMQ 5 for some time, and have found
it a really nice solution, in particular enabling users to work with JMS
with almost no setup.
We do have a desire to slim down our dependenc
