Improve JAXB Exception handling

[ketola]

I tested the issue with resteasy-reactive-jaxb and confirmed that the response is Internal Server Error (500) when posting an invalid xml body.
I tried to reproduce the issue in the existing jaxb integration test, but that one returns Bad Request (400). I added tests for confirming this.
I had to create a new integration test module resteasy-reactive-jaxb to be able to reproduce the issue with the reactive implementation. That test has been implemented to expect Bad Request (400) so at the moment the test is failing until the exception handling is fixed.

• Fixes Avoid throwing a RuntimeException when parsing an invalid XML body using JAXB #39375

[ketola]

I'm not sure should I discuss the proposed fix here or in the issue. But here's what I commented in the issue earlier:

Based on my tests in the Draft PR I noticed that the resteasy-reactive-jaxb and resteasy-jaxb behave differently. The reactive implementation returns 500 when an invalid xml is sent and the other one returns 400. My suggestion is that resteasy-reactive-jaxb would be modified to work like resteasy-reactive-jackson works when invalid json is sent -> WebApplicationException resulting in http 400.
I could go on and try to fix it if this sounds like a plan? I would also need to add an integration test module as I have done in the pr to bring up the issue and verify the fix.

[quarkus-bot]

Status for workflow Quarkus Documentation CI

This is the status report for running Quarkus Documentation CI on commit 0a777ca.

✅ The latest workflow run for the pull request has completed successfully.

It should be safe to merge provided you have a look at the other checks in the summary.

[ketola]

Well I went ahead and implemented the exception handling in a similar way that it is done in jackson as it was not a big task and I changed the status to ready for review.
But for the future, if I would want some feedback for the plan on how I would do the fix before actually doing it, how should I go about it? Should I just change the status to ready for review even though the fix is not finished or tag the reviewer in a pr comment?

[github-actions]

😭 Deploy PR Preview failed.

[gsmet]

Thanks for the pull request.

I agree that the changes make sense and thank you for having a look into it and providing a pull request.

One minor gripe though: I would prefer if the test could be moved to https://github.com/quarkusio/quarkus/tree/main/extensions/resteasy-reactive/rest-jaxb/deployment/src/test/java/io/quarkus/resteasy/reactive/jaxb/deployment/test instead.

Adding an IT module means adding several minutes to the native build and I'm not sure it's worth it in this case.
A small test in the deployment module should be easier to add (you will have to adapt your test a bit though, have a look at the other tests that are already in the module).

Thanks!

[ketola]

@gsmet ok, yeah the deployment/runtime division confused me first and I didn't notice the module had tests also there. But I removed the integration tests and added a test for the invalid xml in the module tests 👍

[gsmet]

Looks great! Thanks.

Let's get CI to run and merge it once it is green.

[quarkus-bot]

Status for workflow Quarkus CI

This is the status report for running Quarkus CI on commit 744ccfb.

✅ The latest workflow run for the pull request has completed successfully.

It should be safe to merge provided you have a look at the other checks in the summary.

[gsmet]

Merged! Thanks for your contribution!