Skip to main content
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [jsonp-dev] : JsonProvider.JSONP_PROVIDER_FACTORY potential breaking change in JSON-P 2.1?
  • From: Nathan Rauh <nathan.rauh@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2022 15:18:54 +0000
  • Accept-language: en-US
  • Arc-authentication-results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=us.ibm.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=us.ibm.com; dkim=pass header.d=us.ibm.com; arc=none
  • Arc-message-signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-ChunkCount:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-0:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-1; bh=AAvy2E8eLImVzksc+ErVoEoMx2pb00x3NG1Dwisnywk=; b=Edh5ZiQ5jSzH64nr591ehbtCclwBdGaDTwWHNeJh179VGNLafWxHD49HAGWsfmGTST8cI+9KYSK7cQcslxw5x9jVijvUfTd6dFtjlSvu2MN1kKr2L82MCrr0JZEW817N2v/RyEyR30ZR4JWkDbBCnZjawagit+2C6PLhpQaKsQtqWt6h4Np76bl/kWSI3S9a97ATy2FHOPdmJn8vnMqSG/u22k/4J1LmrAYgp3mY49q7616z3azwFz9TuqdS6T0FWB/619kCjSTBDqGVFpiojzZjs4Oh7iKl5EtawjFQl638RAEsx0DjkDHhdSTwPBmvn8BYhE4qp7gMYgdMD6Z6cg==
  • Arc-seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=oK7dMZmS9+Nl5YSaMzn4q92/8bIK96gAMBCDf5K4qsvI8r7PyGQ/YCmlKDZnWvo48qfxlTejPTu5td6uyzpqAECI731o2qbQzbQCDMbCJjhJoVyP+ElVKQhuCLSbUAV5k3Hw6EicLQRZ6AuIB8ubjsYJN9RJXsnD3/l9V8/lprcZWuSEXd6evviZm4ydkFP519CK+I9w0QzeKRCH+z3P73wkhQUSmlobWs9a1aNVtYXRtIcwhNahpfVMuhojt88jYkm/PmQ6Snuj01UaxGN2WqsS0k4eD9Wp7EmWQe/C4jZcfhPwRFVOBiVE7fBrQjLiGEonDUKj6ZhYUHaA6tJ1uA==
  • Delivered-to: jsonp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
  • List-archive: <https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/private/jsonp-dev/>
  • List-help: <mailto:jsonp-dev-request@eclipse.org?subject=help>
  • List-subscribe: <https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jsonp-dev>, <mailto:jsonp-dev-request@eclipse.org?subject=subscribe>
  • List-unsubscribe: <https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/options/jsonp-dev>, <mailto:jsonp-dev-request@eclipse.org?subject=unsubscribe>
  • Thread-index: AQHYKmy5Ur6AOXUqSkOaSHZXlqL9+6ylgVcAgAANjoA=
  • Thread-topic: [jsonp-dev] [External] : JsonProvider.JSONP_PROVIDER_FACTORY potential breaking change in JSON-P 2.1?
Lukas,

Sorry for only linking to the source location - that seemed the most convenient to identify the exact location of what I was referring to but didn't illustrate what the JavaDoc looks like.  Yes, @value does show the actual value in the text, but that text is rendered as a link to the constant, which doesn't go anywhere after being switched from public to private.  The JavaDoc HTML looks like this:

'If the system property <a href="#JSONP_PROVIDER_FACTORY">"jakarta.json.provider"</a> exists, then its value is assumed to be the provider factory class.'

That said, I noticed you've already gotten it fixed under https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/jsonp/pull/365 and the new JavaDoc under https://jakarta.oss.sonatype.org/content/groups/staging/jakarta/json/jakarta.json-api/2.1.0/ dated today looks good with the link working again.  Thanks!



On 2/26/22, 2:30 AM, "jsonp-dev on behalf of Lukas Jungmann" <jsonp-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx on behalf of lukas.jungmann@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

    Hi,


    On 2/25/22 6:25 PM, Nathan Rauh wrote:
    > Hi,
    > 
    > While trying to identify what is new in EE 10 for JSON-P,


    there are multiple ways to easily (I hope!) find that out before the 
    release gets published:

    release record: 
    https://projects.eclipse.org/projects/ee4j.jsonp/releases/2.1

    spec index page (through the spec pr): 
    https://github.com/jakartaee/specifications/pull/432 

    project on GH: https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/jsonp/projects/1 

    and lastly the diff: 
    https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/jsonp/compare/2.0.0...2.1.0-RELEASE 


    > However, the switch to from public to private visibility seems like a 
    > mistake given that it continues to be referenced from public JavaDoc 
    > within the same class,

    @value uses the actual value of the constant being referenced, see the 
    documentation/man of javadoc for more details on this. Or have you 
    found the constant name anywhere in the _generated_ javadoc and not just 
    in sources?

    but yes, I see no problem in moving the constant back to public, even 
    though I believe that the real impact of this change is rather limited 
    (close to zero)


    thanks,
    --lukas
    _______________________________________________
    jsonp-dev mailing list
    jsonp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
    To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jsonp-dev

Back to the top