Joe Littlejohn

I definitely like the idea of this. It's obviously a significant, breaking change to the way the classes are currently generated so we should probably add it as a config...

Nope, no work has been done on this feature.

Unless someone provides an implementation, I think it's safe to say, no.

@tviegut Thanks for the nudge. I've had a quick look through that PR and added some comments on what's left to do.

Couple of comments on this: - We should support either a string or array as the value of `deserializationClassProperty`, rather than splitting on `,`. - I think you may be...

Thanks, could you also squash these commits into one?

Is this part a breaking change for anyone using the existing deserializationClassProperty feature? ``` patch - jsonTypeInfo.param("use", JsonTypeInfo.Id.CLASS); - jsonTypeInfo.param("include", JsonTypeInfo.As.PROPERTY); - jsonTypeInfo.param("property", annotationName); + jsonTypeInfo.param("use", JsonTypeInfo.Id.NAME); + jsonTypeInfo.param("include", JsonTypeInfo.As.WRAPPER_OBJECT);...

It's possible to have a JSON schema with no meaningful rules or types to generate. This means the plugin has done its work but there is nothing to do. Until...

Thanks for raising this. This is a nice idea but I see a few problems that would hold this back: - Reducing boilerplate is less important when the code is...

I'm going to close this as I think it's just too much work and not useful to enough users. If anyone else is interested in this then please comment here,...