That makes more sense ;)
"JSON-P" is an incredibly bad abbreviation considering JSONP is something
completely different.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Anil Saldhana" <Anil.Saldhana(a)redhat.com>
To: keycloak-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
Sent: Tuesday, 6 May, 2014 4:45:22 PM
Subject: Re: [keycloak-dev] can we ditch org.json?
Sorry for being cryptic.
I was referring to
https://jcp.org/en/jsr/detail?id=353 (part of JavaEE 7)
I think this JSR was heavily influenced by Jackson.
JSONP as in JAXP. :)
On 05/06/2014 10:36 AM, Stian Thorgersen wrote:
> Do we need JSONP?
>
> My assumption was that browsers we need to support (at least with the js
> adapter) have CORS support.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Anil Saldhana" <Anil.Saldhana(a)redhat.com>
>> To: keycloak-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>> Sent: Tuesday, 6 May, 2014 4:30:25 PM
>> Subject: Re: [keycloak-dev] can we ditch org.json?
>>
>> Should we start looking at JSONP libraries?
>>
>> My personal preference is Jackson too. But I see a lot of usage of
>> Jackson,Jettison,org.json, g-json in various OSS projects.
>>
>> I wonder if the time to standardize on the json-p library has come.
>>
>> On 05/05/2014 05:25 PM, Bill Burke wrote:
>>> Would it be possible to ditch org.json and use Jackson instead?
>>> Specifically the JsonSerialization class?
>>>
>>> It will just be one less library that needs to go through productization.
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> keycloak-dev mailing list
>> keycloak-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/keycloak-dev
>>
> _______________________________________________
> keycloak-dev mailing list
> keycloak-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/keycloak-dev
_______________________________________________
keycloak-dev mailing list
keycloak-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/keycloak-dev