Make API depend only on jackson-annotations

[bsideup]

This change is 

[codecov-io]

Codecov Report

Merging #1279 into master will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is n/a.

@@          Coverage Diff           @@
##           master   #1279   +/-   ##
======================================
  Coverage      75%     75%           
======================================
  Files           1       1           
  Lines          16      16           
======================================
  Hits           12      12           
  Misses          3       3           
  Partials        1       1

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 066f268...d59d082. Read the comment docs.

[darinhoward]

Is it possible to use https://github.com/FasterXML/jackson-annotations as the dependency and keep this existing annotations ?

[bsideup]

Why would you want to keep them?

The goal is to make API have zero dependencies.

[darinhoward]

I feel that the inclusion of a dependency of jackson-annotations (small api footprint) is a more simplistic solution than custom annotations and a custom JacksonAnnotationIntrospector. This would similar to the inclusion of slf4j-api.

[bsideup]

Unlike Slf4j, Jackson does not provide an "api" artifact. It brings two dependencies (annotations and core) and makes it extremely hard to shade.

So, unless there is any issue with the introspection, I would like to proceed.

[darinhoward]

I'm suggesting using this dependency - it has no dependency on core - it just contains the annotations. Now if that doesn't include all the annotations in use - then the custom annotations would be needed.

<dependency> <groupId>com.fasterxml.jackson.core</groupId> <artifactId>jackson-annotations</artifactId> <version>${jackson.version}</version> </dependency>

[bsideup]

@darinhoward ok, although I think we can/should avoid Jackson in the public API, I guess a good first step will be to only use jackson-annotations, yes. We can introduce custom annotations later, but at least we can work with it. Thanks for the feedback.

Although I kept toPrimitive/fromPrimitive to avoid a dependency on Jackson's serialization abstractions, since otherwise we need another dependency