Thank you! On Mon, May 8, 2017 at 5:52 PM, Sebastien <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Andrea, > > The issue is fixed in openjson, not committed to master yet but the > diffpatch is here: > https://github.com/openjson/openjson/commit/427087efb1c9d9d737cfbe237caf1c > 1812664a5c > > As soon the fix is picked in wicket-6 / wicket-7, we should be able to roll > a new release... > > Thanks & best regards, > Sebastien. > > > On Sat, Apr 29, 2017 at 3:07 PM, Andrea Del Bene <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > This vote has been canceled. We are waiting for > > https://github.com/openjson/openjson/issues/8 to be solved. > > > > > > > > On 23/04/2017 11:47, Sebastien wrote: > > > >> Hi Maxim, > >> > >> Here we are: https://github.com/openjson/openjson/issues/8 > >> Hope the explanation in there makes my idea clearer! :) > >> > >> Thanks a lot, > >> Sebastien. > >> > >> On Sun, Apr 23, 2017 at 5:47 AM, Maxim Solodovnik <[email protected] > > > >> wrote: > >> > >> This is the thing I don't understand :( > >>> > >>> to/from string is standard way of serializing/deserializing JSONObject > >>> The original issue was regarding JSONObject constructing from "Bean > >>> instanceof JSONString" > >>> It make sense, Bean provide desired method of "being JSONObject", we > >>> should > >>> use this method in constructor > >>> > >>> Maybe this discussion should be moved to github? so other openjson > >>> contributors can participate? > >>> > >>> > > >
