Hi!
I recently fixed a few bugs in Johnzon and also had to slightly change the
behaviour for an edge case.
Consider having the following class
@JsonbTypeSerializer(MySerializer.class)
@JsonbTypeDeserializer(MyDeserializer.class)
public class MyPojo1 {
private String a;
private int b;
...
}
and you use that in a
public class MyPojo2 {
private int x;
private MyPojo1 val;
...
}
In this case the Json for MyPojo2 always looks like
{
"x":4711;
"val":WHATEVER
}
Where WHATEVER is whatever the MySerializer writes. That might be a primitive
or a complex JsonValue.
The exact same output is generated if you don't have the @JsonbTypeSerializer
annotation on MyPojo1 but give the MySerializer.class as
JsonbConfig#withSerializer.
BUT if you do move the annotation from the MyPojo1 class to the field in
MyPojo2, then our old code did behave different. In this case we did give the
JsonbSerializer control over the WHOLE attribute. That means you also had to
explicitly write the attribute name as well! Means instead of
{
"x":4711;
"val":WHATEVER
}
you did get
{
"x":4711;
WHATEVER
}
That WHATEVER in this case could also be dozen different attribute embedded
directly in the json structure of MyPojo2. I didn't get this at first and there
is also no unit test nor TCK test for it. Actually this whole part is badly
underspecified it seems. I just fixed the "JsonGenerationException:
write(param) is only valid in arrays" I reported in JOHNZON-421.
I think the new behaviour is arguably more consistent and is also what is
indicated by blog posts by other big EE vendors. Still it is a small change
which might justify or even require to update our minor version. Means I'd
prefer going to up to Johnzon 2.1.0 and 1.3.0.
Wdyt?
txs and LieGrue,
strub
