Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add feature to inverse read/write access logic #4761

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: 2.19
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

ggrebert
Copy link

@ggrebert ggrebert commented Oct 22, 2024

@cowtowncoder replacement of #2966

fix #2951

@JooHyukKim
Copy link
Member

Did u mean to PR against master(version3) branch?
Asking this since it seems like something that can be applied to 2.19

@ggrebert
Copy link
Author

the target branch of this PR is 2.19

Copy link
Member

@JooHyukKim JooHyukKim left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks clean

@cowtowncoder cowtowncoder added the cla-needed PR looks good (although may also require code review), but CLA needed from submitter label Oct 24, 2024
@cowtowncoder
Copy link
Member

Looks clean! One quick question @ggrebert: have we asked for (and received) a CLA earlier?
It's from

https://github.com/FasterXML/jackson/blob/master/contributor-agreement.pdf .

If not, we'd need it before merging (just once; good for any and all future contributions).
The usual way is to print it, fill & sign, scan/photo, email to cla at fasterxml dot com.
Once I get it I can merge the PR to get feature added in for 2.19!

Thank you again for contributing this feature; looking forward to merging it.

@ggrebert
Copy link
Author

CA signed and sended

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
cla-needed PR looks good (although may also require code review), but CLA needed from submitter
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Inverse access of @JsonProperty(access=) so it can work differently on server side and client side
3 participants