Re: TomEE 8 Jsonb Provider

FYI https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-2233 Romain Manni-Bucau @rmannibucau | Blog | Old Blog | Github | LinkedIn

Re: TomEE 8 Jsonb Provider

looks good Romain Manni-Bucau @rmannibucau | Blog | Old Blog | Github | LinkedIn | Book

Re: TomEE 8 Jsonb Provider

I’ve added a couple of more tests. Let me know if you are looking for something in particular. > On 10 Aug 2018, at 20:36, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote: > > sonds good but should probably be more unit tested (@JohnzonProperty > typically) to be covered since it is not a real official feature > > L

Re: TomEE 8 Jsonb Provider

Hi Gurkan! We did that already last year. And the outcome back then was as described in option A ;) LieGrue, strub > Am 08.08.2018 um 22:24 schrieb Gurkan Erdogdu : > > Hello Mark > Instead of using this thread, can you please create a new VOTE thread on > this (versioning for the TomEE 8 rele

Re: TomEE 8 Jsonb Provider

sonds good but should probably be more unit tested (@JohnzonProperty typically) to be covered since it is not a real official feature Le 10 août 2018 19:14, "Roberto Cortez" a écrit : I had a look and I think that work is already done. If you look closely to JsonbAccessMode, it already delegates

Re: TomEE 8 Jsonb Provider

I had a look and I think that work is already done. If you look closely to JsonbAccessMode, it already delegates to the FieldAndMethodAccessMode from Johnzon, or uses the one defined in the johnzon.accessModeDelegate property. I think there is only one thing missing, which is, the JsonbAccessMod

Re: TomEE 8 Jsonb Provider

MP doesnt require it yet - will in 2.0 pby. Issue we have is to know you use jsonb. That said, thinking out loud tomee can impl a johnzon accessmode merging jsonb and native model which would solve most of it with a few tomee glue code in tomee cxf rs listener for priorities. Sounds the best comp

Re: TomEE 8 Jsonb Provider

Hello Mark Instead of using this thread, can you please create a new VOTE thread on this (versioning for the TomEE 8 release) ? Regards. Gurkan On Tue, Aug 7, 2018 at 3:33 PM, Mark Struberg wrote: > Folks, probably it's easier to push hard for a first TomEE8 release? > Things like the JsonbProvi

Re: TomEE 8 Jsonb Provider

I think we should push to include a MP compatible version as well. Right now, all other major vendors have compatible distributions and we are sitting at zero. The JsonbProvider is an issue both for the EE8 and MP stuff. I'm fine that we are not TCK compliant. On the other hand, this would be th

Re: TomEE 8 Jsonb Provider

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

Re: TomEE 8 Jsonb Provider

would work, A then Romain Manni-Bucau @rmannibucau | Blog | Old Blog | Github | LinkedIn | Book

Re: TomEE 8 Jsonb Provider

Hello Mark, Non-binding: +1 for you proposal A) to release a TomEE 8.0.0 before Jakarta TCKs are available, and call the Jakarta Tc's-certified version a 8.1.x : simple and efficient ! Thanks, Alexandre Le mar. 7 août 2018 à 14:33, Mark Struberg a écrit : > > Folks, probably it's easier to push

Re: TomEE 8 Jsonb Provider

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

Re: TomEE 8 Jsonb Provider

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-

Re: TomEE 8 Jsonb Provider

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+

Re: TomEE 8 Jsonb Provider

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

Re: TomEE 8 Jsonb Provider

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 i

Re: TomEE 8 Jsonb Provider

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 | Blog | Old Blog |

Re: TomEE 8 Jsonb Provider

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 behavi

Re: TomEE 8 Jsonb Provider

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 docume

TomEE 8 Jsonb Provider

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