-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.7k
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
Move RESTEasy provider registration as unremovable beans to common module #22609
Conversation
This is needed because without this change, applications that only include the rest-client without including the server component, result in the providers not being registered as unremovable beans. Fixes: quarkusio#22605
This is done in order to ensure that the rest-client properly registers providers when the server part is not around
@@ -3,5 +3,6 @@ quarkus.datasource.jdbc.url=jdbc:tracing:postgresql://localhost:5432/mydatabase | |||
quarkus.datasource.jdbc.driver=io.opentracing.contrib.jdbc.TracingDriver | |||
quarkus.datasource.username=sa | |||
quarkus.datasource.password=sa | |||
quarkus.rest.single-default-produces=false |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This is needed because RESTEasy Reactive will default to text/plain
when returning String
from a JAX-RS Resource method, but this default is not what this integration uses
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I added a comment about the test but feel free to merge as is if you disagree.
<dependency> | ||
<groupId>io.quarkus</groupId> | ||
<artifactId>quarkus-resteasy-mutiny</artifactId> | ||
</dependency> | ||
|
||
<!-- Client dependencies --> | ||
<dependency> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm thinking about this and I'm not sure it's worth making this test a Frankenstein. I think I would just drop the testing on this one.
But YMMV.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I actually wanted to have this test because I think it's relatively easy for us to miss this in the future
Ah ah, I was looking at fixing #20498 and it ends up being the same issue :). |
Excellent ! |
This is needed because without this change, applications that only
include the rest-client without including the server component,
result in the providers not being registered as unremovable beans.
Fixes: #22605
Fixes: #20498