Re: [jsonp-dev] [External] : Re: : JsonProvider.JSONP_PROVIDER_FACTORY p

[Lukas Jungmann <lukas.jungmann@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On 2/26/22 4:18 PM, Nathan Rauh wrote:
> 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.'

ah, so was about broken link. Well, when I provided fix for few hundreds 
of them, nobody cared and it is unlikely someone will ever will (see 
https://github.com/jakartaee/specifications/pull/346)

regards,
--lukas

> That said, I noticed you've already gotten it fixed under https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/jsonp/pull/365__;!!ACWV5N9M2RV99hQ!fYBMJdzpwTYQa4NXv3lIFgQqr0G7D-8LogYOVZFs2Zpqnhunt9lW6Dr50uD1QAtqgFQ$  and the new JavaDoc under https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://jakarta.oss.sonatype.org/content/groups/staging/jakarta/json/jakarta.json-api/2.1.0/__;!!ACWV5N9M2RV99hQ!fYBMJdzpwTYQa4NXv3lIFgQqr0G7D-8LogYOVZFs2Zpqnhunt9lW6Dr50uD1NP_vy2I$  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://urldefense.com/v3/__https://projects.eclipse.org/projects/ee4j.jsonp/releases/2.1__;!!ACWV5N9M2RV99hQ!fYBMJdzpwTYQa4NXv3lIFgQqr0G7D-8LogYOVZFs2Zpqnhunt9lW6Dr50uD1SYpqtWI$
>
>      spec index page (through the spec pr):
>      https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://github.com/jakartaee/specifications/pull/432__;!!ACWV5N9M2RV99hQ!fYBMJdzpwTYQa4NXv3lIFgQqr0G7D-8LogYOVZFs2Zpqnhunt9lW6Dr50uD1LNtFaq8$
>
>      project on GH: https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/jsonp/projects/1__;!!ACWV5N9M2RV99hQ!fYBMJdzpwTYQa4NXv3lIFgQqr0G7D-8LogYOVZFs2Zpqnhunt9lW6Dr50uD1LBMQkxU$
>
>      and lastly the diff:
>      https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/jsonp/compare/2.0.0...2.1.0-RELEASE__;!!ACWV5N9M2RV99hQ!fYBMJdzpwTYQa4NXv3lIFgQqr0G7D-8LogYOVZFs2Zpqnhunt9lW6Dr50uD1jaoGKxs$
>
>
>      > 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://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jsonp-dev__;!!ACWV5N9M2RV99hQ!fYBMJdzpwTYQa4NXv3lIFgQqr0G7D-8LogYOVZFs2Zpqnhunt9lW6Dr50uD1vW50CNA$
>
> _______________________________________________
> jsonp-dev mailing list
> jsonp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jsonp-dev__;!!ACWV5N9M2RV99hQ!fYBMJdzpwTYQa4NXv3lIFgQqr0G7D-8LogYOVZFs2Zpqnhunt9lW6Dr50uD1vW50CNA$