db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "David W. Van Couvering" <David.Vancouver...@Sun.COM>
Subject Re: Backward compatibility of DataSource implementations
Date Wed, 23 Nov 2005 16:44:13 GMT
Hm, I'm not sure if I am interested in venturing into these waters.  The 
email I sent was about making sure I understaood how things are done 
today: DataSource implementations implement Serializable and define 
compatibility requirements in the form I described.

I think the ideas of using Referenceable or writing our own custom 
serialization code are interesting, but it's not my itch to scratch 
right now (unless it's required as part of solving the itch I have to 
provide a custom classloader).


Bernt M. Johnsen wrote:
> Additional comment to √ėyvinds:
> If we are to make these objects (or other objects in Derby)
> Serializable *AND* backward compatible we should not pose restrictions
> on how they are implemented like you suggest. Instead, custom
> serialization should be used (by means serial version UID and
> writeObject/readObject or writeReplace/readResolve). On the pitfalls
> of serialization, i recommend Chapter 10 in Jushua Bloch's "Effective
> Java". 

View raw message