yes
Romain Manni-Bucau @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog <https://blog-rmannibucau.rhcloud.com> | Old Blog <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <https://github.com/rmannibucau> | LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | JavaEE Factory <https://javaeefactory-rmannibucau.rhcloud.com> 2017-03-30 23:11 GMT+02:00 COURTAULT Francois < francois.courta...@gemalto.com>: > Hello Romain, > > My bad, forget to report generic=Object for the interfaces > (MessageBodyWriter and MessageBodyReader) :-( > So, the second solution works. > > For, the first solution, you mean: > @Consumes(MediaType.APPLICATION_JSON) > @Produces(MediaType.APPLICATION_JSON) > @Provider > public class MyJsonProvider extends JacksonJsonProvider { > ... > }, right ? > > Best Regards. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Romain Manni-Bucau [mailto:rmannibu...@gmail.com] > Sent: jeudi 30 mars 2017 19:25 > To: users@tomee.apache.org > Subject: [+SPAM+]: Re: : Re:: Re: : Re: Re: No issue with 7.0.2 but issue > with 7.0.3 using @JsonProperty coming from jackson > > you have 2 options: > > 1. extends JacksonJsonProvider > 2. > > @Consumes(MediaType.APPLICATION_JSON) > @Produces(MediaType.APPLICATION_JSON) > @Provider > public class MyJsonProvider implements MessageBodyWriter<Object>, > MessageBodyReader<Object> { > private final JacksonJsonProvider provider = new JacksonJsonProvider(); > > @Override > public boolean isWriteable(final Class<?> aClass, final Type type, > final Annotation[] annotations, final MediaType mediaType) { > return provider.isWriteable(aClass, type, annotations, mediaType); > } > > @Override > public long getSize(final Object o, final Class<?> aClass, final Type > type, final Annotation[] annotations, final MediaType mediaType) { > return provider.getSize(o, aClass, type, annotations, mediaType); > } > > @Override > public void writeTo(final Object o, final Class<?> aClass, final Type > type, final Annotation[] annotations, final MediaType mediaType, final > MultivaluedMap<String, Object> multivaluedMap, final OutputStream > outputStream) throws IOException, WebApplicationException { > provider.writeTo(o, aClass, type, annotations, mediaType, > multivaluedMap, outputStream); > } > > @Override > public boolean isReadable(final Class<?> aClass, final Type type, > final Annotation[] annotations, final MediaType mediaType) { > return provider.isReadable(aClass, type, annotations, mediaType); > } > > @Override > public Object readFrom(final Class<Object> aClass, final Type type, > final Annotation[] annotations, final MediaType mediaType, final > MultivaluedMap<String, String> multivaluedMap, final InputStream > inputStream) throws IOException, WebApplicationException { > return provider.readFrom(aClass, type, annotations, mediaType, > multivaluedMap, inputStream); > } > } > > > > Romain Manni-Bucau > @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog < > https://blog-rmannibucau.rhcloud.com> | Old Blog < > http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <https://github.com/rmannibucau> > | LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | JavaEE Factory < > https://javaeefactory-rmannibucau.rhcloud.com> > > 2017-03-30 19:19 GMT+02:00 COURTAULT Francois < > francois.courta...@gemalto.com>: > > > Hello Romain, > > > > Already tried that: > > @Override > > public Object readFrom(Class<Object> aClass, Type type, > > Annotation[] annotations, MediaType mediaType, MultivaluedMap<String, > > String> multivaluedMap, InputStream inputStream) throws IOException, > > WebApplicationException { > > return null; > > } > > > > But it doesn't compile:-( Method doesn't overwrite method from its > > superclass. > > > > Best Regards. > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Romain Manni-Bucau [mailto:rmannibu...@gmail.com] > > Sent: jeudi 30 mars 2017 18:57 > > To: users@tomee.apache.org > > Subject: [+SPAM+]: Re: [+SPAM+]: Re: [+SPAM+]: Re: Re: No issue with > > 7.0.2 but issue with 7.0.3 using @JsonProperty coming from jackson > > > > set the generic=Object > > > > > > Romain Manni-Bucau > > @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog < > > https://blog-rmannibucau.rhcloud.com> | Old Blog < > > http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github > > <https://github.com/rmannibucau> > > | LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | JavaEE Factory > > | < > > https://javaeefactory-rmannibucau.rhcloud.com> > > > > 2017-03-30 18:55 GMT+02:00 COURTAULT Francois < > > francois.courta...@gemalto.com>: > > > > > Hello Romain, > > > > > > I tried your solution but I have one issue. > > > The signature readFrom is public T readFrom(Class<T> aClass, Type > > > type, Annotation[] annotations, MediaType mediaType, > > > MultivaluedMap<String, > > > String> multivaluedMap, InputStream inputStream) throws IOException, > > > WebApplicationException > > > > > > But JacksonJsonProvider has the following signature public Object > > > readFrom(Class<Object> type, Type genericType, Annotation[] > > > annotations, MediaType mediaType, MultivaluedMap<String, String> > > > httpHeaders, InputStream entityStream) throws IOException > > > > > > So it doesn't compile with this code: > > > @Override > > > public T readFrom(Class<T> aClass, Type type, Annotation[] > > > annotations, MediaType mediaType, MultivaluedMap<String, String> > > > multivaluedMap, InputStream inputStream) throws IOException, > > > WebApplicationException { > > > return delegate.readFrom(aClass, type, annotations, mediaType, > > > multivaluedMap, inputStream); > > > } > > > > > > Do you have a solution ? > > > > > > Best Regards. > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Romain Manni-Bucau [mailto:rmannibu...@gmail.com] > > > Sent: jeudi 30 mars 2017 18:44 > > > To: users@tomee.apache.org > > > Subject: [+SPAM+]: Re: [+SPAM+]: Re: Re: No issue with 7.0.2 but > > > issue with 7.0.3 using @JsonProperty coming from jackson > > > > > > 2017-03-30 18:41 GMT+02:00 COURTAULT Francois < > > > francois.courta...@gemalto.com>: > > > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > > > The thing is that we have only @Provider defined for > ExceptionMapper... > > > > > > > > So, if I have understood you well, in order to use Jackson as the > > > > JAX-RS provider instead of Johnzon in TomEE 7.x, I have to define > > > > a new provider class which delegates, in the methods we have to > > > > implement for the MessageBodyReader, MessageBodyWriter interfaces, > > > > to the JacksonJsonProvider, right ? > > > > > > > > > > > Yep, should be 5 methods only > > > > > > > > > > I will try to send you a test case in order to see what happens > > > > and why we have a different behavior between TomEE 7.0.2 and 7.0.3. > > > > > > > > > > Think it is cause we migrated johnzon default to cxf bus instead of > > > adding it manually to apps and filter it out if johnzon is there. > > > But to be honest issue cause is still a bug in jackson (or a not > > > backward compatible change in jaxrs 2). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Best Regards. > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Romain Manni-Bucau [mailto:rmannibu...@gmail.com] > > > > Sent: jeudi 30 mars 2017 15:14 > > > > To: users@tomee.apache.org > > > > Subject: [+SPAM+]: Re: Re: No issue with 7.0.2 but issue with > > > > 7.0.3 using @JsonProperty coming from jackson > > > > > > > > 2017-03-30 15:08 GMT+02:00 COURTAULT Francois < > > > > francois.courta...@gemalto.com>: > > > > > > > > > Hello Romain, > > > > > > > > > > All our JAX-RS endpoints are annotated by with @Consumes({ > > > > > MediaType.APPLICATION_JSON }) and /or @Produces({ > > > > > MediaType.APPLICATION_JSON }). > > > > > And no specific configuration has been done in order to set > > > > > Jackson as the JAX-RS provider for our application. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Was @Consumers/@Produces on the @Provider (jackson), not your > endpoint. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So, does it mean that we have to explicitly define the JAX-RS > > > > > provider in TomEE ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > No, scanning still works as requested by users so you can do > > > > something like (pseudo code, didnt check it compiles): > > > > > > > > @Provider > > > > @Consumes(MediaType.APPLICATION_JSON) > > > > @Produces(MediaType.APPLICATION_JSON) > > > > public class JsonProv<T> implements MessageBodyReader<T>, > > > > MessageBodyWriter<T> { private final JacksonJsonProvider delegate > > > > = new JacksonJsonProvider(); > > > > > > > > // delegate all methods > > > > } > > > > > > > > And that's it > > > > > > > > > > > > > If yes, the right way to do that is to have an openejb-jar.xml > > > > > in the war with the following content ? > > > > > <openejb-jar xmlns="http://www.openejb.org/openejb-jar/1.1"; > > > > > xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"; > > > > > xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openejb.org/openejb-jar/1.1";> > > > > > <pojo-deployment class-name="jaxrs-application"> > > > > > <properties> > > > > > cxf.jaxrs.providers = com.fasterxml.jackson.jaxrs. > > > > > json.JacksonJsonProvider > > > > > </properties> > > > > > </pojo-deployment> > > > > > </openejb-jar> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Best Regards. > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > From: Romain Manni-Bucau [mailto:rmannibu...@gmail.com] > > > > > Sent: jeudi 30 mars 2017 12:47 > > > > > To: users@tomee.apache.org > > > > > Subject: [+SPAM+]: Re: [+SPAM+]: Re: No issue with 7.0.2 but > > > > > issue with > > > > > 7.0.3 using @JsonProperty coming from jackson > > > > > > > > > > 2017-03-30 12:15 GMT+02:00 COURTAULT Francois < > > > > > francois.courta...@gemalto.com>: > > > > > > > > > > > Hello Romain, > > > > > > > > > > > > Not sure to understand. TomEE 7.0.2 is JAX-RS 2.0 as well as > > > > > > TomEE 7.0.3, right ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What do you mean by "ensure jackson was set with > > > > > > application/json mediatype" ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > By default TomEE uses Johnzon since first 7.0.0 release. It sets > > > > > it as the least prioritized application/json provider to let the > > > > > users use something else and the usage be quite smooth and > automatic. > > > > > > > > > > Jackson doesn't respect this JAXRS constraint (yes JAXRS 1 -> > > > > > JAXRS > > > > > 2 resolution got clarified...and broke even if it shouldnt have > > been). > > > > > In 2 words jackson uses */* which means the last one to use if > > > > > none are matching. Since johnzon uses application/json (and > > > > > application/*+json IIRC) then it is used cause matching the > > > > > request > > > > where jackson doesnt. > > > > > > > > > > If you wrap jackson provider in a custom one changing this > > > > > @Consumes and @Produces it will work automatically. > > > > > > > > > > Here is the bug > > > > > https://github.com/FasterXML/jackson-jaxrs-json-provider/ > > > > > blob/master/src/main/java/com/fasterxml/jackson/jaxrs/json/ > > > > > JacksonJsonProvider.java#L55 > > > > > for memories > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > We just use, as mentioned, Jackson annotations, we don't > > > > > > perform any initialization at Jackson level in our code ? > > > > > > > > > > > > Best Regards. > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > From: Romain Manni-Bucau [mailto:rmannibu...@gmail.com] > > > > > > Sent: jeudi 30 mars 2017 11:56 > > > > > > To: users@tomee.apache.org > > > > > > Subject: [+SPAM+]: Re: No issue with 7.0.2 but issue with > > > > > > 7.0.3 using @JsonProperty coming from jackson > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi > > > > > > > > > > > > did you ensure jackson was set with application/json mediatype > > > > > > and not its default */* which means "least prioritized" since > > JAXRS 2.0? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Romain Manni-Bucau > > > > > > @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog < > > > > > > https://blog-rmannibucau.rhcloud.com> | Old Blog < > > > > > > http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github > > > > > > <https://github.com/rmannibucau> > > > > > > | LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | JavaEE > > > > > > | Factory < > > > > > > https://javaeefactory-rmannibucau.rhcloud.com> > > > > > > > > > > > > 2017-03-30 11:54 GMT+02:00 COURTAULT Francois < > > > > > > francois.courta...@gemalto.com>: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > We have a rest Api which uses POJO classes with Bean > > > > > > > Validation annotations (like @Pattern, @NotNull) and Jackson > > > > > > > annotations like @JsonProperty. > > > > > > > Previously, using TomEE 7.0.2, we have no issue using the > > > > > > > @JsonProperty Jackson annotation. Indeed, this kind of > > > > > > > annotations was > > > > > > taken into account. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But when we migrate to 7.0.3, it seems that the > > > > > > > @JsonProperty Jackson annotation is not anymore taking into > > > > > > > account ☹ Is there any way to fix that ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Best Regards. > > > > > > > ________________________________ This message and any > > > > > > > attachments are intended solely for the addressees and may > > > > > > > contain confidential information. Any unauthorized use or > > > > > > > disclosure, either whole or partial, is > > > > prohibited. > > > > > > > E-mails are susceptible to alteration. Our company shall not > > > > > > > be liable for the message if altered, changed or falsified. > > > > > > > If you are not the intended recipient of this message, > > > > > > > please delete it and notify the > > > > > > sender. > > > > > > > Although all reasonable efforts have been made to keep this > > > > > > > transmission free from viruses, the sender will not be > > > > > > > liable for damages caused by a transmitted virus. > > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ This message and any > > > > > > attachments are intended solely for the addressees and may > > > > > > contain confidential information. Any unauthorized use or > > > > > > disclosure, either whole or partial, is > > > prohibited. > > > > > > E-mails are susceptible to alteration. Our company shall not > > > > > > be liable for the message if altered, changed or falsified. If > > > > > > you are not the intended recipient of this message, please > > > > > > delete it and notify the > > > > > sender. > > > > > > Although all reasonable efforts have been made to keep this > > > > > > transmission free from viruses, the sender will not be liable > > > > > > for damages caused by a transmitted virus. > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ This message and any > > > > > attachments are intended solely for the addressees and may > > > > > contain confidential information. Any unauthorized use or > > > > > disclosure, either whole or partial, is > > prohibited. > > > > > E-mails are susceptible to alteration. Our company shall not be > > > > > liable for the message if altered, changed or falsified. If you > > > > > are not the intended recipient of this message, please delete it > > > > > and notify the > > > > sender. > > > > > Although all reasonable efforts have been made to keep this > > > > > transmission free from viruses, the sender will not be liable > > > > > for damages caused by a transmitted virus. > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > > > This message and any attachments are intended solely for the > > > > addressees and may contain confidential information. Any > > > > unauthorized use or disclosure, either whole or partial, is > prohibited. > > > > E-mails are susceptible to alteration. Our company shall not be > > > > liable for the message if altered, changed or falsified. If you > > > > are not the intended recipient of this message, please delete it > > > > and notify the > > > sender. > > > > Although all reasonable efforts have been made to keep this > > > > transmission free from viruses, the sender will not be liable for > > > > damages caused by a transmitted virus. > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > > This message and any attachments are intended solely for the > > > addressees and may contain confidential information. Any > > > unauthorized use or disclosure, either whole or partial, is prohibited. > > > E-mails are susceptible to alteration. Our company shall not be > > > liable for the message if altered, changed or falsified. If you are > > > not the intended recipient of this message, please delete it and > > > notify the > > sender. > > > Although all reasonable efforts have been made to keep this > > > transmission free from viruses, the sender will not be liable for > > > damages caused by a transmitted virus. > > > > > ________________________________ > > This message and any attachments are intended solely for the > > addressees and may contain confidential information. Any unauthorized > > use or disclosure, either whole or partial, is prohibited. > > E-mails are susceptible to alteration. Our company shall not be liable > > for the message if altered, changed or falsified. If you are not the > > intended recipient of this message, please delete it and notify the > sender. > > Although all reasonable efforts have been made to keep this > > transmission free from viruses, the sender will not be liable for > > damages caused by a transmitted virus. > > > ________________________________ > This message and any attachments are intended solely for the addressees > and may contain confidential information. Any unauthorized use or > disclosure, either whole or partial, is prohibited. > E-mails are susceptible to alteration. Our company shall not be liable for > the message if altered, changed or falsified. If you are not the intended > recipient of this message, please delete it and notify the sender. > Although all reasonable efforts have been made to keep this transmission > free from viruses, the sender will not be liable for damages caused by a > transmitted virus. >
