---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/53784/#review155990
---
Ship it!
Ship It!
- Kevin Duling
On Nov. 15, 2016, 7:06
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/53784/#review155978
---
Ship it!
Ship It!
- Kirk Lund
On Nov. 15, 2016, 3:06 p.m.,
> On Nov. 15, 2016, 4:43 p.m., Kevin Duling wrote:
> > Why would we move away from using Jackson in favor of our own JSON mapping
> > code? Or is this a special case where we do some magic serialization we
> > can't do via Jackson?
>
> Jinmei Liao wrote:
> I tried using Jackson's
> On Nov. 15, 2016, 4:43 p.m., Kevin Duling wrote:
> > Why would we move away from using Jackson in favor of our own JSON mapping
> > code? Or is this a special case where we do some magic serialization we
> > can't do via Jackson?
>
> Jinmei Liao wrote:
> I tried using Jackson's
> On Nov. 15, 2016, 4:43 p.m., Kevin Duling wrote:
> > Why would we move away from using Jackson in favor of our own JSON mapping
> > code? Or is this a special case where we do some magic serialization we
> > can't do via Jackson?
I tried using Jackson's converter, but it's giving errors
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/53784/#review155927
---
Why would we move away from using Jackson in favor of our own
