Hi

I like this approach.

As to replacement options: I'd go for Apache Johnzon. First it's Apache hence 
eating our own dogfood. But more importantly, it is an implementation of the 
standard javax.json API. I much prefer standard APIs over the fragmented JSON 
API scene.

Regards
Felix

Von meinem iPad gesendet

> Am 01.12.2016 um 23:14 schrieb Justin Edelson <jus...@justinedelson.com>:
> 
> While I think that it is a good idea in theory to remove our custom JSON
> library, I don't think that is practical in the near term. So I think our
> best course of action is a multistep process:
> 
> 1) Rewrite org.apache.commons.json using
> https://github.com/tdunning/open-json.
> 2) Select a new standard library
> 3) Modify internal-usages of org.apache.commons.json to use library from #2.
> 4) Handle API usage of org.apache.commons.json on a case-by-case basis.
> 
> Agree with Stefan that Semantic Versioning is critical for library
> selection. I'm not sure that Jackson actually does this. As far as I can
> tell, they only use SemVer at the bundle level, not the package level.
> 
> 
> On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 4:32 PM Stefan Seifert <sseif...@pro-vision.de>
> wrote:
> 
>> following [4] it looks that the best options are currently either GSON or
>> Jackson.
>> i think GSON has smaller footprint and is more compact, but both are good
>> options.
>> 
>> another criteria for choosing is: do they publish their APIs following
>> semantic versioning? otherwise we have the same dilemma as with guava.
>> for jackson this is the case, see
>> https://github.com/FasterXML/jackson/wiki/Jackson-Releases
>> for gson i've not found a documentation, but it seems they follow it as
>> well, have not checked in detail.
>> 
>> stefan
>> 
>> 
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Robert Munteanu [mailto:rmunt...@adobe.com]
>>> Sent: Monday, November 28, 2016 10:35 PM
>>> To: dev@sling.apache.org
>>> Subject: New JSON library
>>> 
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>> The JSON license has been moved to 'Category X' [1] which means that we
>>> can no longer use the org.json library. This has been announced on the
>>> legal@ mailing list, please see [2] for the complete picture.
>>> 
>>> We have until 30 Apr 2017 to remove all dependencies and inclusions of
>>> the org.json library. We may decide to do this earlier, of course.
>>> 
>>> I think it's a good time to drive down the TEF [3] of Sling and move to
>>> using a more mainstream JSON library. I don't have a strong opinion on
>>> the replacement, but I added a couple of ideas at [4].
>>> 
>>> Anyone with an opinion, do chime in :-)
>>> 
>>> Thanks,
>>> 
>>> Robert
>>> 
>>> 
>>> [1]: https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved#category-x
>>> [2]: https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/bb18f942ce7eb83c11438303c818b
>>> 885810fb76385979490366720d5@%3Clegal-discuss.apache.org%3E
>>> [3]: Technical Exoticity Factory - I made it up on the spot
>>> [4]: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/SLING/New+JSON+library
>> 

Reply via email to