Actually it just seems to be used in the leveldb adapter and the partitioning support. So afaict it is purely optional for us?
https://github.com/apache/activemq/search?p=3&q=jackson&unscoped_q=jackson <https://github.com/apache/activemq/search?p=3&q=jackson&unscoped_q=jackson> and yeah, it potentially creates problems due to json-p clashes. LieGrue, strub > Am 13.03.2020 um 17:58 schrieb Mark Struberg <[email protected]>: > > Hi and thanks, Richard! > > I think we should get rid of it. And it also shows one of the challenges of > the TomEE project: we consume a lot of other projects. Actually for 95% of > TomEE problems we need to fix some upstream project. Or improve it. > > In this case the right solution would have been to reach out for the ActiveMQ > team and simply remove the direct need for Jackson. > We've done that for CXF as well btw. > And now we need to finally do it for ActiveMQ as well. > > This is what people often do not see. For every line Romain and I touch in > TomEE we have about 200 lines we touch in other projects upstream. > Don't be afraid, those communities are awesome as well! > > LieGrue, > strub > > >> Am 13.03.2020 um 15:25 schrieb Zowalla, Richard >> <[email protected]>: >> >> Hi, >> >> I think the explanation is here >> http://tomee-openejb.979440.n4.nabble.com/Why-jackson-and-jonhzon-shipped-with-latest-TomEE-td4689451.html >> >> Best, >> Richard >> >> Am Freitag, den 13.03.2020, 14:19 +0100 schrieb Alex The Rocker: >>> Hello, >>> >>> I fully agree with Mark's remark : why would TomEE ever need jackson >>> nice it has johnzon? >>> Duplicating JSON-P implementations should like a bad idea... >>> >>> Kind regards, >>> Alexandre >>> >>> Le ven. 13 mars 2020 à 12:29, Mark Struberg >>> <[email protected]> a écrit : >>>> >>>> Btw, why do we ship jackson anyway? >>>> We used to have Johnzon only. Jackson is imo not required. >>>> What was the reason we re-introduced it? >>>> >>>> >>>> LieGrue, >>>> strub >>>> >>>>> Am 11.03.2020 um 11:26 schrieb dkwakkel <[email protected]>: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> FasterXML jackson-databind 2.0.0 through 2.9.10.2 lacks certain >>>>> xbean-reflect/JNDI blocking, as demonstrated by >>>>> org.apache.xbean.propertyeditor.JndiConverter. >>>>> >>>>> 8.0.1 ships jackson-databind-2.10.0.jar and xbean-reflect- >>>>> 4.14.jar >>>>> >>>>> CVE score is 9.8, so can we expect soon TomEE 8.0.2 with this fix >>>>> in it? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Sent from: >>>>> http://tomee-openejb.979440.n4.nabble.com/TomEE-Dev-f982480.html >
