Markus KARG

What is the current status of this issue?

Again: What is the current status of this issue?

What we like to reach is that we can have an _immutable_ read-only POJO. In contrast to typical _mutbable_ POJOs those are needed in many real-world applications to do product...

@rmannibucau From the aspect *of an application provider / adapter provider* I think it would be beneficial to *no* have a distinction among how / where adapters are registered. Such...

> @mkarg even if I agree on the overall target, it also means adapter are useless if we dont do this distinction because one of both type is never usable...

> @mkarg useless in the ultra generic definition. At the end we just have JsonValue (+ Number + String) -> JAVA adapters, it is not in terms of generics. The...

> @mkarg I agree on that but it can't be implemented. How do you: > > 1. select the adapter to use? based on a single side of the types?...

> _mappable_ means all classes specified in "Default Mapping" (3) section of the spec. @m0mus To be 100% sure: This *includes* the ability to write an adapter which maps and...

Well, it would be nice if the two of you could find an agreement whether we talk about (3) or (3.3)... :-)

@rmannibucau Thanks, but in fact it would be good to clearly put that information into the JavaDocs.