Hi, >From what we discussed on this issue, the thing is that our jsonb access mode does not enable the visibility to see all readers/writers cause there is some hardcoded filtering in the delegates so I think the trick is to simply add a toggle to the delegates access modes we use to not have this filtering and 100% rely on the visibility filtering in jsonbaccess mode we already have in place.
Before the release we must also ensure getters computation cache is cleaned up after the ClassMapping is created - we don't want to keep that in memory at runtime and not sure we can clean up at another time since we don't want a background thread for that. I also think it is not worth to depends on java.beans (java.desktop module) so we would reimpl decapitalize as we already did somewhere else (it is one liner anyway ;)). Lastly, FieldAndMethodAccessMode constructor compatibility must be restored (it is part of our API and used), default should stay 1-1 but as mentionned I'd add a new toggle (with a constructor calling "this" to keep the backward compat) to ignore the filtering. Sounds like this way we solve all issues and can release. Romain Manni-Bucau @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <https://github.com/rmannibucau> | LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book <https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance> Le lun. 21 mars 2022 à 09:00, Mark Struberg <strub...@yahoo.de.invalid> a écrit : > To sum this up: > > The problem lies partly in the JSON-B spec. It doesn't define what happens > if there are class hierarchies like class A extends B. > > In 3.7.1 it states that > For a serialization operation, if a matching public getter method exists, > the method is called to obtain the value of the property. If a matching > getter method with private, protected, or defaulted to package-only access > exists, then this field is ignored. If no matching getter method exists and > the field is public, then the value is obtained directly from the field. > > This can get changed y using a @JsonbVisibility > > 4.6 Custom visibility > To customize scope and field access strategy as specified in section > 3.7.1, it is possible to specify javax.json.bind.annotation.JsonbVisibility > annotation or to override default behavior globally calling > JsonbConfig::withPropertyVisibilityStrategy method with given custom > property visibility strategy. > > > The problem is that that the PropertyVisibilityStrategy is simply not > ready to implement the rules of 3.7.1 in a portable way when it comes to > class hierarchies > > https://github.com/apache/geronimo-specs/blob/trunk/geronimo-jsonb_1.0_spec/src/main/java/javax/json/bind/config/PropertyVisibilityStrategy.java > < > https://github.com/apache/geronimo-specs/blob/trunk/geronimo-jsonb_1.0_spec/src/main/java/javax/json/bind/config/PropertyVisibilityStrategy.java > > > > So either we say that the spec simply does not define what should happen > in case of hierarchic classes (totally valid imo) or we need to ditch our > DefaultPropertyVisibility logic completely. It's simply not possible to > implement it that way. > > The reason why I removed the logic from the Reader is the following: Even > if the reader says 'oh there is a getter, so let's hide the property' you > STILL are perfectly allowed - as per the spec - to have Visibility > strategies which do disable ALL methods and ONLY use field access. > That means the current impl is surely more correct than before, but not > yet perfect. > > LieGrue, > strub > > > > > Am 28.02.2022 um 11:17 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibu...@gmail.com > >: > > > > Hi JL, > > > > Last commit broke some stuff. > > Dicussed it quickly offline with Mark but Im AFK for a few days, can it > > wait some days? Otherwise maybe just pick this commit? > > > > Le lun. 28 févr. 2022 à 10:37, Jean-Louis Monteiro < > jlmonte...@tomitribe.com> > > a écrit : > > > >> Hi all, > >> > >> Is it ok to release a 1.2.17? > >> I'm looking for a Jakarta EE fix - > >> > >> > https://github.com/apache/johnzon/commit/a1c53d99c3280cbfc35b369ac4ce138e12f1d5ff > >> > >> Do you guys have some additional fixes to push? > >> -- > >> Jean-Louis Monteiro > >> http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro > >> http://www.tomitribe.com > >> > >
