+1
With the caveat that this is the least worst option. Json is just text so it can be easily parsed by your favourite json library.
If I'm writing a web api which exposes json services I would be annoyed if my jdbc driver has decided which json library I'll use for my web api, or I'd have to use two different libraries and bloat my jar/war.
Álvaro, Dave,
If I understand you right, you "just" want to make "usage of json
feature" easy for end-users.
So do I.
If there is more, please add.
What if we do the following?
1) We keep "base" part of driver "unaware" of json. In other words,
calls like getObject(1, JsonValue.class) would end up in "@throws
SQLException if conversion is not supported" (as per ResultSet's
javadoc)
2) Add "pgjdbc-json" module (i.e. jar) that adds support for
getObject(1, JsonValue.class), setObject(1, JsonValue) kind of calls.
3) Document "best choice of json dependencies" right in the readme. I
think we would be fine even with simple "we tested just jackson and it
works with pgjdbc".
From the end-user perspective it will be:
1) Using driver as usual -- "just add one mvn dependency" --
'org.postgresql:postgresql:9.4-1201-jdbc41'
2) Adding json support -- add additional one --
'org.postgresql:postgresql-json:9.4-1201-jdbc41' and
'best-of-the-best-pgjdbc-approved-json-impl:3.14.15'.
Both items would be available on the top of readme as copy&paste ready snippets.
This covers "json support" and it is user-friendly: no additional
googling is required to use the feature.
Am I missing anything?
Vladimir
--
Sent via pgsql-jdbc mailing list (pgsql-jdbc@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-jdbc