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

Wrong module auto-registered when using JPMS #259

Closed
karbi opened this issue Jan 3, 2023 · 2 comments
Closed

Wrong module auto-registered when using JPMS #259

karbi opened this issue Jan 3, 2023 · 2 comments
Milestone

Comments

@karbi
Copy link

karbi commented Jan 3, 2023

As I understand module com.fasterxml.jackson.datatype.jsr310.JSR310Module is left for compatibility and com.fasterxml.jackson.datatype.jsr310.JavaTimeModule should be default one. However when using ObjectMapper.findAndRegisterModules() with JPMS in Java9+ JSR310Module is loaded as declared in module-info.java.

It should be changed as in #126 to maintain same behavior between modularized and non-modularized environments.

karbi pushed a commit to APDU-pl/jackson-modules-java8 that referenced this issue Jan 3, 2023
@cowtowncoder cowtowncoder linked a pull request Jan 7, 2023 that will close this issue
@cowtowncoder
Copy link
Member

Yes, you are absolutely correct @karbi. Happy to merge this, but as per my comment on PR, needs to be against 2.15 -- although I think it's the right thing to do I am hesitant to do this in patch as it's technically changing behavior.

@cowtowncoder cowtowncoder changed the title Incorrect module auto-registred when using JPMS Incorrect module auto-registered when using JPMS Jan 8, 2023
@cowtowncoder cowtowncoder changed the title Incorrect module auto-registered when using JPMS Wrong module auto-registered when using JPMS Jan 8, 2023
@cowtowncoder cowtowncoder added this to the 2.15.0 milestone Jan 8, 2023
@cowtowncoder
Copy link
Member

Merged in 2.15 branch to be included in 2.15.0.

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 a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants