Hi,
sorry, it will be fixed next push. Our git repo is outdated one commit
of deployed version, where group ID has changed.
Roman
On 06/23/2016 03:55 AM, Eddú Meléndez Gonzales wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have a concern:
>
> Now, the groupId in build.gradle is
> *org.eclipse.persistence.json.bind* and the artifact has been
> uploaded to
> https://oss.sonatype.org/content/repositories/snapshots/org/eclipse/persistence/jsonb-ri/1.0-SNAPSHOT/,
> so according to the url I have to use the following dependency, which
> works:
>
> <dependency>
> <groupId>org.eclipse.persistence</groupId>
> <artifactId>jsonb-ri</artifactId>
> <version>1.0-SNAPSHOT</version>
> </dependency>
> But, if I want to download the code to see current changes I have to
> change the groupId. Will it be fixed in the future?
>
> Can you clarify this, please?
>
> Thanks in advance.
>
>
> *Eddú Meléndez Gonzales*
> *eddu.melendez_at_gmail.com* <mailto:eddu.melendez_at_gmail.com>
> *_at_eddumelendez*
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 9:29 AM, Reza Rahman <reza_rahman_at_lycos.com
> <mailto:reza_rahman_at_lycos.com>> wrote:
>
> Any chance this page could be updated with a sample Maven snippet:
> http://www.eclipse.org/eclipselink//jsonb/? If you don't have the
> resources we could offer help in updating the page perhaps even
> with a nicer logo. What do you think?
>
>
> On 6/16/2016 8:52 AM, Roman Grigoriadi wrote:
>>
>> Artifacts has been uploaded to
>> https://oss.sonatype.org/content/repositories/snapshots/org/eclipse/persistence/jsonb-ri/1.0-SNAPSHOT/.
>> Please keep in mind, that besides 1.0-snapshot version,
>> implementation work is still in progress.
>>
>> Roman.
>>
>>
>> On 06/15/2016 12:02 AM, Dmitry Kornilov wrote:
>>>
>>> We haven’t published it yet. There were some technical problems
>>> with eclipse repository. Roman is working on it. I expect it to
>>> be done tomorrow.
>>>
>>> *From:*Reza Rahman [mailto:reza_rahman_at_lycos.com]
>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, June 14, 2016 11:58 PM
>>> *To:* users_at_jsonb-spec.java.net <mailto:users_at_jsonb-spec.java.net>
>>> *Subject:* [jsonb-spec users] Re: Public Review
>>>
>>> Any updates on publishing the binaries? A number of JUGs are
>>> interested in adopting the JSR.
>>>
>>> On 6/14/2016 5:56 PM, Dmitry Kornilov wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Nathan,
>>>
>>> Thanks for your comments. You can find my answers inline.
>>>
>>> *From:*Nathan Rauh [mailto:nathan.rauh_at_us.ibm.com]
>>> *Sent:* Friday, June 10, 2016 10:23 PM
>>> *To:* users_at_jsonb-spec.java.net
>>> <mailto:users_at_jsonb-spec.java.net>;
>>> jsr367-experts_at_jsonb-spec.java.net
>>> <mailto:jsr367-experts_at_jsonb-spec.java.net>
>>> *Subject:* [jsonb-spec users] Re: Public Review
>>>
>>> I'll start off by saying excellent job everyone on writing
>>> this spec!
>>> I was proofreading it to catch any possible errors and only
>>> found a few things that are all very minor,
>>>
>>> 1.3:
>>> "Support Support and integration with..."
>>> should be
>>> "Support and integration with..."
>>>
>>> Fixed.
>>>
>>>
>>> 3.7.1:
>>> "When only public getter/setter method without corresponding
>>> field is present in the class, ..."
>>> should be
>>> "When only public getter/setter methods without
>>> corresponding fields are present in the class, ..."
>>>
>>> Fixed.
>>>
>>>
>>> 3.17.1:
>>> Figure 2: Example Type resolution is showing a Hello World
>>> Java program rather than the intended example. Does anyone
>>> have a copy of what the actual example was intended to be or
>>> do we need to write one?
>>>
>>> Fixed.
>>>
>>>
>>> 4.4:
>>> refers to
>>> JsonbConfig::withStrictIJSONSerializationCompliance, however
>>> the method on JsonbConfig is actually called "withStrictIJSON".
>>> Also, this section refers to configuration option
>>> "jsonb.i-json.strict-ser-compliance", but the constant value
>>> for javax.json.bind.JsonbConfig.STRICT_IJSON is
>>> "jsonb.strict-ijson".
>>>
>>> Fixed. Shorter names are used.
>>>
>>>
>>> 4.5:
>>> "The name of a parameter can be changed annotating given
>>> parameter with JsonbProperty annotation."
>>> should be
>>> "The name of a parameter can be changed by annotating the
>>> given parameter with the JsonbProperty annotation."
>>>
>>> Fixed.
>>>
>>>
>>> javax.json.bind.JsonbConfig:
>>> Given that JsonbConfig.getProperty makes the requirement
>>> "Attempting to get an undefined property will result in a
>>> JsonbException being thrown", so that you can never have a
>>> return value for an undefined property name, what is the
>>> point of having it return Optional rather than Object?
>>> public final Optional<Object> getProperty(String name)
>>> Note that getAtMap() returns property values within the map
>>> as Object, not Optional. Seems like getProperty ought to be
>>> the same.
>>>
>>> I think a better solution would be to get rid of a
>>> requirement of throwing an unchecked exception if property
>>> doesn’t exist in the map.
>>>
>>>
>>> javax.json.bind.adapter.JsonbAdapter
>>> Sample 2 has
>>> JsonbAdapter<Box<T>, Integer<T>>
>>> should be
>>> JsonbAdapter<Box<T>, Integer>
>>>
>>> Agree. Roman will fix it tomorrow.
>>>
>>>
>>> javax.json.bind.annotation.JsonbCreator
>>> There are couple of minor grammatical errors in
>>> "Annotation provides way how to use custom constructor or
>>> factory method to create instance of the associated class."
>>> I'd recommend rewriting it,
>>> "This annotation identifies the custom constructor or
>>> factory method to use when creating an instance of the
>>> associated class."
>>>
>>> Agree. Roman will fix it tomorrow.
>>>
>>>
>>> It seems awkward that the spec has two ways to set nillable
>>> annotatively:
>>> @JsonbNillable
>>> and
>>> @JsonbProperty(nillable=true)
>>> I understand the two have different targets:
>>> @Target(value={ANNOTATION_TYPE,TYPE,PACKAGE})
>>> vs
>>> @Target(value={ANNOTATION_TYPE,METHOD,FIELD,PARAMETER})
>>> Would it be clearer to remove nillable from @JsonbProperty
>>> and just allow @JsonbNillable in all of the targets?
>>>
>>> I agree. We will remove nilable parameter from
>>> @JsonbProperty and fix @JsonbNilable targets.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Dmitry
>>>
>>>
>>> From: Dmitry Kornilov <dmitry.kornilov_at_oracle.com
>>> <mailto:dmitry.kornilov_at_oracle.com>>
>>> To: <users_at_jsonb-spec.java.net
>>> <mailto:users_at_jsonb-spec.java.net>>
>>> Date: 05/26/2016 04:12 AM
>>> Subject: [jsonb-spec users] Public Review
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> JSONB spec Public Review is posted!
>>> https://jcp.org/en/jsr/detail?id=367
>>>
>>> Congratulations and thanks to everyone who participated in
>>> the spec development! Great job!
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Dmitry Kornilov
>>> JSONB spec lead
>>> @m0mus
>>>
>>
>
>