Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[#815] Indicate that JAXB is optional #854

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Mar 28, 2020

Conversation

andymc12
Copy link
Contributor

@andymc12 andymc12 commented Mar 10, 2020

Modifications to the spec doc and javadoc that indicate that JAXB is optional. Where possible, I tried to keep the language consistent with JSON-P / JSON-B - i.e. if the product supports JSON-B, then it must have a built-in entity provider to handle JSON requests - likewise for JAXB / XML.

This change is targeted for the master branch (3.0), and should also go into the 3.1-SNAPSHOT branch.

Fixes #815

@andymc12 andymc12 added this to the 3.0 (formerly 2.2) milestone Mar 10, 2020
@andymc12 andymc12 self-assigned this Mar 10, 2020
Copy link
Contributor

@mkarg mkarg left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Cannot fasttrack Spec and JavaDoc changes according to our committer rules.

Copy link

@kwsutter kwsutter left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Just a couple of questions. You guys are the experts, so I'll leave it to you on how to answer them. Otherwise, looks good!

also include those for JSON. For more information about these providers
see <<jsonp>> and <<jsonb>>.
also include those for JSON or XML. For more information about these providers
see <<jsonp>>, <<jsonb>> and <<jaxb>>.

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I like the oxford comma after <<jsonb>>, but maybe that's just me... :-)

@andymc12
Copy link
Contributor Author

@mkarg - you're right. no fast track on this one. Thanks for pointing it out. You have requested changes, but I didn't see any comments indicating what you'd like to see changed.

@kwsutter I don't have a strong opinion about the extra comma - I've seen it both ways (with and without a comma before the last object). If you're ok with it, I'll leave it as-is unless there are other changes that need to go in.

Thanks!

Copy link
Contributor

@chkal chkal left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks good. Thanks.

Copy link
Contributor

@mkarg mkarg left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The requested change was to not fast track this PR. I removed that phrase from the description.

@mkarg
Copy link
Contributor

mkarg commented Mar 28, 2020

@andymc12 Why not merging this one?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Make dependency on JAXB optional
5 participants