[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       activemq-dev
Subject:    Re: Using JSON-B in ActiveMQ
From:       Jonathan Gallimore <jonathan.gallimore () gmail ! com>
Date:       2021-02-02 11:38:28
Message-ID: CAGRgoZgZbHFm-ub5NE0h0H7PEnmWRuMG93hB+o-ZtKqNfe15rw () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]


Thanks for the feedback - I'll look at this targeting 5.17!

Jon

On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 6:32 PM Matt Pavlovich <mattrpav@gmail.com> 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 volatility.
>
> > On Jan 28, 2021, at 5:36 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofre <jb@nanthrax.net>
> wrote:
> >
> > 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 leveled, etc).
> > Else, go ahead, we will rebase.
> >
> > My +1
> >
> > Regards
> > JB
> >
> >> Le 28 janv. 2021 Ã  11:34, Jonathan Gallimore <
> jonathan.gallimore@gmail.com> a écrit :
> >>
> >> 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 dependencies, and I would like to
> >> propose that ActiveMQ potentially use JSON-B as opposed to being tightly
> >> coupled to one specific JSON parsing library.
> >>
> >> This has previously been discussed on
> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/AMQ/issues/AMQ-7072, and it
> sounded
> >> like the community was open to using JSON-B, but would strongly want to
> >> stick with Jackson as the default serializer.
> >>
> >> I'd like to have a go at working on this. If I was able to make the
> change
> >> to use JSON-B, (and I appreciate that may need work here (which I'm
> also ok
> >> to contribute to):
> >> https://github.com/FasterXML/jackson-future-ideas/issues/19. If I
> could do
> >> this, and keep Jackson as the default serializer, would this be a
> >> contribution that the community could consider?
> >>
> >> Many thanks
> >>
> >> Jon
> >
>
>


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]