Tatu Saloranta

@matthew-pwnieexpress You are correct in that no work is planned for this feature. I can see how this is unexpected from users perspective: difference is due to technical evolution of...

@henryptung Interesting thought... hmmh. There is also then the possible question of what if more than one such "any property" is declared. I guess this is not problematic with POJOs...

True; as of now (2.9), `@JsonAnyGetter` must be on method. In theory it could be extended to fields, to allow construction of `Map` instance. One challenge would be the fact...

@odrotbohm I can't think of anything: `@JsonUnwrapped` is quite tied to way BeanSerializer and -Deserializer works and although one can override handlers I am not sure custom (de)serializer route would...

Ok, marking this as "most-wanted" as there are a few thumbs-ups here too. About the only question I have is whether there are some specific differences between just using `@JsonAnyGetter`/`@JsonAnySetter`...

@Vroo Conceptually, `JsonNode` types are not POJOs, so most annotations do not have any effect by design. It would be good to document this better as I can see why...

@Vroo that said, I can see why specific cases of `@JsonAnyGetter`/`@JsonAnySetter` would make sense for `JsonNode`/`ObjectNode` values -- if so, feel free to file an issue to add support for...

@fprochazka Please don't add things that are not relevant for the specific issues. For usage questions, mailing list: https://groups.google.com/g/jackson-user works wonders. For issues to report, file a new one UNLESS...

Hmmh. Well, looking at it, it's a more complicated case where `Record` is also problematic, as well as any setter -- I guess my point was that it does not...

Note: implementation was merged from branch `exp/iterative-jsonnode-2.13` (hash `f93fd41028b6efcc7c41401dd271aa7d81da6cf3` ?), included in release 2.13.0 -- this issue added retroactively for tracking purposes.