db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Mike Matrigali (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (DERBY-6128) Examine Derby classes to determine if we need to add serialVersionUID to any of them
Date Fri, 19 Apr 2013 16:01:16 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-6128?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13636520#comment-13636520
] 

Mike Matrigali commented on DERBY-6128:
---------------------------------------

+1 to adding a new JIRA to fix problem in previous releases.  Worst case if no one is interested
in doing that work we could
put examples of the problems someone would get if they hit this, and workarounds.  Maybe using
a certain jvm version is
a workaround?
                
> Examine Derby classes to determine if we need to add serialVersionUID to any of them
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: DERBY-6128
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-6128
>             Project: Derby
>          Issue Type: Task
>          Components: JDBC
>            Reporter: Rick Hillegas
>             Fix For: 10.11.0.0
>
>         Attachments: derby-6128-ecpds40.diff, releaseNote.html, SerializableLister.java
>
>
> The discussion on DERBY-6124 has raised the possibility that we may need to add serialVersionUIDs
to some serializable Derby classes. Without the serialVersionUIDs, Derby may encounter deserialization
errors on objects which were serialized by one version of Derby or the JVM and then deserialized
by another version of Derby or the JVM.

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

Mime
View raw message