geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dain Sundstrom <>
Subject Re: API and serialization compatibility, was: Build Failure
Date Sat, 14 May 2005 22:24:56 GMT

As you point out, the problem of serialization is far reaching.   
Basically, we need to get every project included in Geronimo to buy  
into serialization stability, and to my knowledge there are no  
projects in Geronimo that today have committed to this.  In addition,  
Geronimo itself is does not support serialization stability, and if  
we choose this path, we must clean up our own house by verifying  
every serializable class is set up for upward compatible  
serialization.  This is by no means an easy task, but I think before  
we ask something of other project we are aware of the effort involved  
in what we are asking.

Alternatively, we could choose to do like Sun did with swing and give  
up on serialization and use an xml based storage mechanism based on  
Java Beans rules.


On May 14, 2005, at 1:13 PM, Tim Ellison wrote:

> Jeremy Boynes <> wrote on 14-05-2005 17:47:31:
>> <lots of good stuff snipped />
>> Another thing to remember is that the only classes where  
>> serialization
>> compatibility really matters are those that are actually placed in
>> persistent attributes. I would hope all the projects we use do  
>> support
>> serialization properly, including providing UIDs and dealing with
>> version drift; if not we should encourage them to do so and help  
>> where
>> necessary - it is generally a /good thing/. That will make  
>> configuration
>> management easier for both system administrators as well as the  
>> runtime
>> and deployment systems.
> Glad you agree ;-)

View raw message