Why jackson and jonhzon shipped with latest TomEE?

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
6 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Why jackson and jonhzon shipped with latest TomEE?

dkwakkel
I see both jackson and johnzon are now part of TomEE 8 M2:
jackson-annotations-2.9.0.jar
jackson-core-2.9.4.jar
jackson-databind-2.9.4.jar
jackson-dataformat-yaml-2.9.4.jar
johnzon-core-1.1.11.jar
johnzon-jaxrs-1.1.11.jar
johnzon-jsonb-1.1.11.jar
johnzon-mapper-1.1.11.jar

Should not only johnzon be enough?



--
Sent from: http://tomee-openejb.979440.n4.nabble.com/TomEE-Users-f979441.html
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Why jackson and jonhzon shipped with latest TomEE?

jgallimore
I think ActiveMQ pulls jackson in, as it uses Jackson internally. I don't
know that we could avoid that without forking and making some (potentially
big) changes.

Jon

On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 9:36 AM dkwakkel <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I see both jackson and johnzon are now part of TomEE 8 M2:
> jackson-annotations-2.9.0.jar
> jackson-core-2.9.4.jar
> jackson-databind-2.9.4.jar
> jackson-dataformat-yaml-2.9.4.jar
> johnzon-core-1.1.11.jar
> johnzon-jaxrs-1.1.11.jar
> johnzon-jsonb-1.1.11.jar
> johnzon-mapper-1.1.11.jar
>
> Should not only johnzon be enough?
>
>
>
> --
> Sent from:
> http://tomee-openejb.979440.n4.nabble.com/TomEE-Users-f979441.html
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Why jackson and jonhzon shipped with latest TomEE?

Alex The Rocker
Hello,

I agree with dkwakkel, Apache Johnzon should be enought for all TomEE
runtime requirements.Mixing two different JSON processors in same
classpath can lead to a dependency mess.

After all, ActiveMQ is an Apache project, and even if when it was
developed Apache Johnzon wasn't available, it would make great sense
to replace FasterXML Jackson (which isn't an Apache project, even if
it has Apache License 2.0) by Apache Johnzon.

How about a JIRA request on ActiveMQ for this "small" change ? :)

Kind regards,
Alex

Le mer. 19 juin 2019 à 12:22, Jonathan Gallimore
<[hidden email]> a écrit :

>
> I think ActiveMQ pulls jackson in, as it uses Jackson internally. I don't
> know that we could avoid that without forking and making some (potentially
> big) changes.
>
> Jon
>
> On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 9:36 AM dkwakkel <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > I see both jackson and johnzon are now part of TomEE 8 M2:
> > jackson-annotations-2.9.0.jar
> > jackson-core-2.9.4.jar
> > jackson-databind-2.9.4.jar
> > jackson-dataformat-yaml-2.9.4.jar
> > johnzon-core-1.1.11.jar
> > johnzon-jaxrs-1.1.11.jar
> > johnzon-jsonb-1.1.11.jar
> > johnzon-mapper-1.1.11.jar
> >
> > Should not only johnzon be enough?
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Sent from:
> > http://tomee-openejb.979440.n4.nabble.com/TomEE-Users-f979441.html
> >
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Why jackson and jonhzon shipped with latest TomEE?

jgallimore
It can certainly be requested. It would be up to the ActiveMQ project to
decide if they wanted to make that change. I'd certainly be happy to see
what's involved and have a go and send a PR, but if it involves significant
effort, I personally would prefer to work on EE8 as a higher priority.

Ultimately though, the priorities for the TomEE project ultimately come
down to what the community would like, so feedback is very welcome. Anyone
else have any views?

Jon

On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 11:33 AM Alex The Rocker <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> Hello,
>
> I agree with dkwakkel, Apache Johnzon should be enought for all TomEE
> runtime requirements.Mixing two different JSON processors in same
> classpath can lead to a dependency mess.
>
> After all, ActiveMQ is an Apache project, and even if when it was
> developed Apache Johnzon wasn't available, it would make great sense
> to replace FasterXML Jackson (which isn't an Apache project, even if
> it has Apache License 2.0) by Apache Johnzon.
>
> How about a JIRA request on ActiveMQ for this "small" change ? :)
>
> Kind regards,
> Alex
>
> Le mer. 19 juin 2019 à 12:22, Jonathan Gallimore
> <[hidden email]> a écrit :
> >
> > I think ActiveMQ pulls jackson in, as it uses Jackson internally. I don't
> > know that we could avoid that without forking and making some
> (potentially
> > big) changes.
> >
> > Jon
> >
> > On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 9:36 AM dkwakkel <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > > I see both jackson and johnzon are now part of TomEE 8 M2:
> > > jackson-annotations-2.9.0.jar
> > > jackson-core-2.9.4.jar
> > > jackson-databind-2.9.4.jar
> > > jackson-dataformat-yaml-2.9.4.jar
> > > johnzon-core-1.1.11.jar
> > > johnzon-jaxrs-1.1.11.jar
> > > johnzon-jsonb-1.1.11.jar
> > > johnzon-mapper-1.1.11.jar
> > >
> > > Should not only johnzon be enough?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Sent from:
> > > http://tomee-openejb.979440.n4.nabble.com/TomEE-Users-f979441.html
> > >
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Why jackson and jonhzon shipped with latest TomEE?

Richard Monson-Haefel-3
Unless it can be demonstrated that it actually causes an issue we should
leave it as is and focus on other priorities. Pinging ActiveMQ about it
would not hurt but I suspect its not a priority for them either.

On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 5:45 AM Jonathan Gallimore <
[hidden email]> wrote:

> It can certainly be requested. It would be up to the ActiveMQ project to
> decide if they wanted to make that change. I'd certainly be happy to see
> what's involved and have a go and send a PR, but if it involves significant
> effort, I personally would prefer to work on EE8 as a higher priority.
>
> Ultimately though, the priorities for the TomEE project ultimately come
> down to what the community would like, so feedback is very welcome. Anyone
> else have any views?
>
> Jon
>
> On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 11:33 AM Alex The Rocker <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> > Hello,
> >
> > I agree with dkwakkel, Apache Johnzon should be enought for all TomEE
> > runtime requirements.Mixing two different JSON processors in same
> > classpath can lead to a dependency mess.
> >
> > After all, ActiveMQ is an Apache project, and even if when it was
> > developed Apache Johnzon wasn't available, it would make great sense
> > to replace FasterXML Jackson (which isn't an Apache project, even if
> > it has Apache License 2.0) by Apache Johnzon.
> >
> > How about a JIRA request on ActiveMQ for this "small" change ? :)
> >
> > Kind regards,
> > Alex
> >
> > Le mer. 19 juin 2019 à 12:22, Jonathan Gallimore
> > <[hidden email]> a écrit :
> > >
> > > I think ActiveMQ pulls jackson in, as it uses Jackson internally. I
> don't
> > > know that we could avoid that without forking and making some
> > (potentially
> > > big) changes.
> > >
> > > Jon
> > >
> > > On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 9:36 AM dkwakkel <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > I see both jackson and johnzon are now part of TomEE 8 M2:
> > > > jackson-annotations-2.9.0.jar
> > > > jackson-core-2.9.4.jar
> > > > jackson-databind-2.9.4.jar
> > > > jackson-dataformat-yaml-2.9.4.jar
> > > > johnzon-core-1.1.11.jar
> > > > johnzon-jaxrs-1.1.11.jar
> > > > johnzon-jsonb-1.1.11.jar
> > > > johnzon-mapper-1.1.11.jar
> > > >
> > > > Should not only johnzon be enough?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Sent from:
> > > > http://tomee-openejb.979440.n4.nabble.com/TomEE-Users-f979441.html
> > > >
> >
>


--
Richard Monson-Haefel
https://twitter.com/rmonson
https://www.tomitribe.com/
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Why jackson and jonhzon shipped with latest TomEE?

Cesar Hernandez
Unless it can be demonstrated that it actually causes an issue we should
> leave it as is and focus on other priorities. Pinging ActiveMQ about it
> would not hurt but I suspect its not a priority for them either.


+1

El mié., 19 jun. 2019 a las 6:51, Richard Monson-Haefel (<
[hidden email]>) escribió:

> Unless it can be demonstrated that it actually causes an issue we should
> leave it as is and focus on other priorities. Pinging ActiveMQ about it
> would not hurt but I suspect its not a priority for them either.
>
> On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 5:45 AM Jonathan Gallimore <
> [hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > It can certainly be requested. It would be up to the ActiveMQ project to
> > decide if they wanted to make that change. I'd certainly be happy to see
> > what's involved and have a go and send a PR, but if it involves
> significant
> > effort, I personally would prefer to work on EE8 as a higher priority.
> >
> > Ultimately though, the priorities for the TomEE project ultimately come
> > down to what the community would like, so feedback is very welcome.
> Anyone
> > else have any views?
> >
> > Jon
> >
> > On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 11:33 AM Alex The Rocker <[hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > I agree with dkwakkel, Apache Johnzon should be enought for all TomEE
> > > runtime requirements.Mixing two different JSON processors in same
> > > classpath can lead to a dependency mess.
> > >
> > > After all, ActiveMQ is an Apache project, and even if when it was
> > > developed Apache Johnzon wasn't available, it would make great sense
> > > to replace FasterXML Jackson (which isn't an Apache project, even if
> > > it has Apache License 2.0) by Apache Johnzon.
> > >
> > > How about a JIRA request on ActiveMQ for this "small" change ? :)
> > >
> > > Kind regards,
> > > Alex
> > >
> > > Le mer. 19 juin 2019 à 12:22, Jonathan Gallimore
> > > <[hidden email]> a écrit :
> > > >
> > > > I think ActiveMQ pulls jackson in, as it uses Jackson internally. I
> > don't
> > > > know that we could avoid that without forking and making some
> > > (potentially
> > > > big) changes.
> > > >
> > > > Jon
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 9:36 AM dkwakkel <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I see both jackson and johnzon are now part of TomEE 8 M2:
> > > > > jackson-annotations-2.9.0.jar
> > > > > jackson-core-2.9.4.jar
> > > > > jackson-databind-2.9.4.jar
> > > > > jackson-dataformat-yaml-2.9.4.jar
> > > > > johnzon-core-1.1.11.jar
> > > > > johnzon-jaxrs-1.1.11.jar
> > > > > johnzon-jsonb-1.1.11.jar
> > > > > johnzon-mapper-1.1.11.jar
> > > > >
> > > > > Should not only johnzon be enough?
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Sent from:
> > > > > http://tomee-openejb.979440.n4.nabble.com/TomEE-Users-f979441.html
> > > > >
> > >
> >
>
>
> --
> Richard Monson-Haefel
> https://twitter.com/rmonson
> https://www.tomitribe.com/
>


--
Atentamente:
César Hernández.