Seems today everyone register custom provider. Changing default just mean you have to do so but not for the same case ;) Le 1 nov. 2012 22:35, "Jonathan Gallimore" <[email protected]> a écrit :
> Would this change have the potential to break anyone's existing > applications? If so, can we add a switch so it can still work the current > way? Other than that, it sounds like a reasonable change - it makes sense > to work in the same way as CXF out the box. > > Jon > > On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 5:52 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <[email protected] > >wrote: > > > Your reasons sounds enough to change it for me, > > > > @others: any other opinion? > > > > if everybody is ok to switch the default (maybe wait a week) please > Reinis > > open a jira to change the default > > > > is it ok for you? > > > > *Romain Manni-Bucau* > > *Twitter: @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau>* > > *Blog: **http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/*< > > http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/> > > *LinkedIn: **http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau* > > *Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau* > > > > > > > > > > 2012/11/1 Reinis Vicups <[email protected]> > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > as I understand it, the standard (out-of-the-box) CXF configuration > > > expects the root object not to be wrapped in an array. If this is the > > case, > > > the standard providers work as expected! I checked this on TomEE by > > > removing square brackets from an complex object - they do work. > > > > > > So my question is - how can solution be writing own providers, if: > > > > > > 1. when supplying a single object, JSONProvider formats it as an array > > > causing CXF to fail during unmarshaling thus being unable to unmarshal > > > something it marshaled itself. Shouldn't the default config be the way > > that > > > CXF is atleast able to unmarshal stuff it itself marshaled just a > method > > > ago? > > > > > > 2. default providers work as expected other than in the case when > > provided > > > single root object is falsely(?) formatted as an array? > > > > > > I am experiencing the very same error and just cannot accept these two > > > aspects (CXF being unable to unmarshal something it just marshaled > itself > > > and being forced to write own providers only because of one bug(?)) > > > > > > br > > > Reinis > > > > > > > > > On 10/29/2012 06:11 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote: > > > > > >> well you just need to provide your own providers. you can't just > > override > > >> this attribute. > > >> > > >> here how the conf works: > > >> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.**com/2012/10/04/jax-rsjax-ws-** > > >> configuration-for-tomee-1-5-0/< > > > http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/2012/10/04/jax-rsjax-ws-configuration-for-tomee-1-5-0/ > > > > > >> > > >> *Romain Manni-Bucau* > > >> *Twitter: @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/**rmannibucau< > > https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> > > >> >* > > >> *Blog: **http://rmannibucau.**wordpress.com/*< > > http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/*> > > >> <http://**rmannibucau.wordpress.com/ < > http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/ > > >> > > >> *LinkedIn: **http://fr.linkedin.com/in/**rmannibucau*< > > http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau*> > > >> *Github: https://github.com/**rmannibucau*< > > https://github.com/rmannibucau*> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> 2012/10/29 kcundick <[email protected]> > > >> > > >> Great. Thank you for your response. > > >>> > > >>> Can you give me more information on how you can set the > > serializeAsArray > > >>> to > > >>> false whether within the openejb-jar.xml file or within the > > application? > > >>> > > >>> Thank you again for your time. > > >>> > > >>> Kevin > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> -- > > >>> View this message in context: > > >>> http://openejb.979440.n4.**nabble.com/Possible-JSON-bug-** > > >>> in-TomEE-1-5-and-1-5-1-**tp4658328p4658331.html< > > > http://openejb.979440.n4.nabble.com/Possible-JSON-bug-in-TomEE-1-5-and-1-5-1-tp4658328p4658331.html > > > > > >>> Sent from the OpenEJB User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > >>> > > >>> > > > > > >
