tomee-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From COURTAULT Francois <Francois.Courta...@gemalto.com>
Subject RE: [+SPAM+]: Re: Re: No issue with 7.0.2 but issue with 7.0.3 using @JsonProperty coming from jackson
Date Thu, 30 Mar 2017 16:41:00 GMT
Hello,

The thing is that we have only @Provider defined for ExceptionMapper...

So, if I have understood you well, in order to use Jackson as the JAX-RS provider instead
of Johnzon in TomEE 7.x,  I have to define a new provider class which delegates, in the methods
we have to implement for the MessageBodyReader, MessageBodyWriter interfaces, to the JacksonJsonProvider,
right ?

I will try to send you a test case in order to see what happens and why we have a different
behavior between TomEE 7.0.2 and 7.0.3.

Best Regards.

-----Original Message-----
From: Romain Manni-Bucau [mailto:rmannibucau@gmail.com]
Sent: jeudi 30 mars 2017 15:14
To: users@tomee.apache.org
Subject: [+SPAM+]: Re: Re: No issue with 7.0.2 but issue with 7.0.3 using @JsonProperty coming
from jackson

2017-03-30 15:08 GMT+02:00 COURTAULT Francois <
Francois.Courtault@gemalto.com>:

> Hello Romain,
>
> All our JAX-RS endpoints are annotated by with @Consumes({
> MediaType.APPLICATION_JSON }) and /or  @Produces({
> MediaType.APPLICATION_JSON }).
> And no specific configuration has been done in order to set Jackson as
> the JAX-RS provider for our application.
>

Was @Consumers/@Produces on the @Provider (jackson), not your endpoint.


>
> So, does it mean that we have to explicitly define the JAX-RS provider
> in TomEE ?
>

No, scanning still works as requested by users so you can do something like (pseudo code,
didnt check it compiles):

@Provider
@Consumes(MediaType.APPLICATION_JSON)
@Produces(MediaType.APPLICATION_JSON)
public class JsonProv<T> implements MessageBodyReader<T>, MessageBodyWriter<T>
{  private final JacksonJsonProvider delegate = new JacksonJsonProvider();

 // delegate all methods
}

And that's it


> If yes, the right way to do that is to have an openejb-jar.xml in the
> war with the following content ?
> <openejb-jar xmlns="http://www.openejb.org/openejb-jar/1.1"
> xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"
> xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openejb.org/openejb-jar/1.1">
>     <pojo-deployment  class-name="jaxrs-application">
>         <properties>
>             cxf.jaxrs.providers = com.fasterxml.jackson.jaxrs.
> json.JacksonJsonProvider
>         </properties>
>     </pojo-deployment>
> </openejb-jar>
>
>
> Best Regards.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Romain Manni-Bucau [mailto:rmannibucau@gmail.com]
> Sent: jeudi 30 mars 2017 12:47
> To: users@tomee.apache.org
> Subject: [+SPAM+]: Re: [+SPAM+]: Re: No issue with 7.0.2 but issue
> with
> 7.0.3 using @JsonProperty coming from jackson
>
> 2017-03-30 12:15 GMT+02:00 COURTAULT Francois <
> Francois.Courtault@gemalto.com>:
>
> > Hello Romain,
> >
> > Not sure to understand. TomEE 7.0.2 is JAX-RS 2.0 as well as TomEE
> > 7.0.3, right ?
> >
>
> Yes
>
>
> > What do you mean by "ensure jackson was set with application/json
> > mediatype" ?
> >
>
> By default TomEE uses Johnzon since first 7.0.0 release. It sets it as
> the least prioritized application/json provider to let the users use
> something else and the usage be quite smooth and automatic.
>
> Jackson doesn't respect this JAXRS constraint (yes JAXRS 1 -> JAXRS 2
> resolution got clarified...and broke even if it shouldnt have been).
> In 2 words jackson uses */* which means the last one to use if none
> are matching. Since johnzon uses application/json (and
> application/*+json IIRC) then it is used cause matching the request where jackson doesnt.
>
> If you wrap jackson provider in a custom one changing this @Consumes
> and @Produces it will work automatically.
>
> Here is the bug
> https://github.com/FasterXML/jackson-jaxrs-json-provider/
> blob/master/src/main/java/com/fasterxml/jackson/jaxrs/json/
> JacksonJsonProvider.java#L55
> for memories
>
>
> >
> > We just use, as mentioned, Jackson annotations, we don't perform any
> > initialization at Jackson level in our code ?
> >
> > Best Regards.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Romain Manni-Bucau [mailto:rmannibucau@gmail.com]
> > Sent: jeudi 30 mars 2017 11:56
> > To: users@tomee.apache.org
> > Subject: [+SPAM+]: Re: No issue with 7.0.2 but issue with 7.0.3
> > using @JsonProperty coming from jackson
> >
> > Hi
> >
> > did you ensure jackson was set with application/json mediatype and
> > not its default */* which means "least prioritized" since JAXRS 2.0?
> >
> >
> > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog <
> > https://blog-rmannibucau.rhcloud.com> | Old Blog <
> > http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github
> > <https://github.com/rmannibucau>
> > | LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | JavaEE
> > | Factory <
> > https://javaeefactory-rmannibucau.rhcloud.com>
> >
> > 2017-03-30 11:54 GMT+02:00 COURTAULT Francois <
> > Francois.Courtault@gemalto.com>:
> >
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > We have a rest Api which uses POJO classes with Bean Validation
> > > annotations (like @Pattern, @NotNull) and Jackson annotations like
> > > @JsonProperty.
> > > Previously, using TomEE 7.0.2, we have no issue using the
> > > @JsonProperty Jackson annotation. Indeed, this kind of annotations
> > > was
> > taken into account.
> > >
> > > But when we migrate to 7.0.3, it seems that the @JsonProperty
> > > Jackson annotation is not anymore taking into account ☹ Is there
> > > any way to fix that ?
> > >
> > > Best Regards.
> > > ________________________________
> > >  This message and any attachments are intended solely for the
> > > addressees and may contain confidential information. Any
> > > unauthorized use or disclosure, either whole or partial, is prohibited.
> > > E-mails are susceptible to alteration. Our company shall not be
> > > liable for the message if altered, changed or falsified. If you
> > > are not the intended recipient of this message, please delete it
> > > and notify the
> > sender.
> > > Although all reasonable efforts have been made to keep this
> > > transmission free from viruses, the sender will not be liable for
> > > damages caused by a transmitted virus.
> > >
> > ________________________________
> >  This message and any attachments are intended solely for the
> > addressees and may contain confidential information. Any
> > unauthorized use or disclosure, either whole or partial, is prohibited.
> > E-mails are susceptible to alteration. Our company shall not be
> > liable for the message if altered, changed or falsified. If you are
> > not the intended recipient of this message, please delete it and
> > notify the
> sender.
> > Although all reasonable efforts have been made to keep this
> > transmission free from viruses, the sender will not be liable for
> > damages caused by a transmitted virus.
> >
> ________________________________
>  This message and any attachments are intended solely for the
> addressees and may contain confidential information. Any unauthorized
> use or disclosure, either whole or partial, is prohibited.
> E-mails are susceptible to alteration. Our company shall not be liable
> for the message if altered, changed or falsified. If you are not the
> intended recipient of this message, please delete it and notify the sender.
> Although all reasonable efforts have been made to keep this
> transmission free from viruses, the sender will not be liable for
> damages caused by a transmitted virus.
>
________________________________
 This message and any attachments are intended solely for the addressees and may contain confidential
information. Any unauthorized use or disclosure, either whole or partial, is prohibited.
E-mails are susceptible to alteration. Our company shall not be liable for the message if
altered, changed or falsified. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, please
delete it and notify the sender.
Although all reasonable efforts have been made to keep this transmission free from viruses,
the sender will not be liable for damages caused by a transmitted virus.
Mime
View raw message