New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
ARTEMIS-565 Replace json.org with javax.json #640
Conversation
@johnament +1 on this. TBH I don't really mind which library we use as long as it's Apache compliant and doesn't have silly phrases in the license :P. This looks good to me. |
hi |
4439d23
to
c655298
Compare
Ok, the changes should be good. I manually ran the integration tests that were touched, and fixed a bunch of issues identified there. I'm going to create a ticket to create more lower level json tests. They're a good way to verify contracts in a situation like this. If I were starting this over, I would have added the contracts first. |
I'm not sure why Jenkins didn't write the result back, but the build did pass in Jenkins. |
@johnament this looks good to me. Are you done here? Can I merge it. |
you can't run a server. There is some changes needed on the release packaging:
|
Ah good catch. I can fix that, probably some assembly issues. I'm assuming shipping johnzon as the default is fine? |
Looks fine to me. I reversed engineered the code and I'm not sure how you specify the JSON provider. it seems you need something on the CLASSINFO? Also, I just realized the main pom doesn't specify the licenses. a small thing but since you're changing it, can you also do it? will comment at the pom to make it easier to find it. |
<dependency> | ||
<groupId>org.apache.geronimo.specs</groupId> | ||
<artifactId>geronimo-json_1.0_spec</artifactId> | ||
<version>${json-p.spec.version}</version> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Do you mind mentioning Apache license here, just to keep up the list?
@johnament how users doing embedded will use json? anything special they have to do? or just the maven dependencies would catch it? |
@clebertsuconic yes, once i fix the distribution the johnzon one will ship by default. |
@johnament I was thinking about embedded cases (using the library direct), like wildfly. We can fix whatever needs on wildfly for next versions.. so I was really thinking about other cases.. I will look through the examples. Maybe you could also check it by running artemis-distribution/src/test/scripts/run-examples.sh after building the server. |
@clebertsuconic oh, for wildfly, you'll need to add dependencies on As far as plain library usage, the dependency tree should come in. If you want to plugin your own, just exclude. |
@johnament cool.. thanks a lot. |
Javax.json is a newer JSR, but has an ASF compliant version, is pretty close to the original JSON.org API and will support a standard annotation based JSON-B solution at some point soon. Updated integration tests and removed JSON.org from license.
No problems @clebertsuconic hope it went well. I pushed up fixes, one oddity is that when starting the broker I get this on the console...
Not sure if its related to my changes, or something else. |
I just checked. its happening with my changes. I can't find this log message anywhere though. |
You need to rebase. That issue was resolved last week I believe. |
I checked your commit and it was ok. (I always use this script to merge PRs which will always rebase them, that's probably why it was ok)... no need to rebase on that case |
I included 2 lines change features.xml towards the OSGI bundle and I squashed into your commit. I hope you won't mind. It was easier this way. |
@johnament can you assign this JIRA to yourself? I couldn't find you (don't know why): |
I pinged the PMC to add me as contributor. That will allow JIRA assignment. I must have had something cached, as this was after I rebased. |
Javax.json is a newer JSR, but has an ASF compliant version, is pretty close to the original JSON.org API and will support a standard annotation based JSON-B solution at some point soon.
This is for discussion purposes only at this point.