Create ServiceHolderImpl with correct service implementation type #4100
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Signed-off-by: Christian Kaltepoth <christian@kaltepoth.de>
|
Sorry, this first to fix the issue broke some tests. I guess it won't work this way. Sorry for the noise. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
As described in #4099,
ServiceHolder#getImplementationClass()sometimes doesn't return the actual implementation class of the service, butorg.glassfish.jersey.inject.hk2.InstanceSupplierFactoryBridgeinstead. This leads to the situation that Jersey looks for@Priorityannotations on the wrong type (detailed description in #4099).This change fixes the underlying problem and ordering via
@Priorityworks fine now. Unforunately I wasn't able to reproduce the issue in an integration test. I guess that's because HK2 behaves differently when deploying a real app to Glassfish.