Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-geronimo-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 62969 invoked from network); 14 May 2005 22:56:28 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 14 May 2005 22:56:28 -0000 Received: (qmail 59702 invoked by uid 500); 14 May 2005 23:00:55 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-geronimo-dev-archive@geronimo.apache.org Received: (qmail 59002 invoked by uid 500); 14 May 2005 23:00:52 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@geronimo.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: list-unsubscribe: List-Post: Reply-To: dev@geronimo.apache.org List-Id: Delivered-To: mailing list dev@geronimo.apache.org Received: (qmail 58988 invoked by uid 99); 14 May 2005 23:00:52 -0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=10.0 tests=FORGED_RCVD_HELO X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (hermes.apache.org: local policy) Received: from adsl-209-233-18-245.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net (HELO buttons.boynes.com) (209.233.18.245) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.28) with ESMTP; Sat, 14 May 2005 16:00:52 -0700 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (unknown [192.168.37.184]) by buttons.boynes.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 62B0614468 for ; Sat, 14 May 2005 15:56:21 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <42868212.5010904@apache.org> Date: Sat, 14 May 2005 15:56:18 -0700 From: Jeremy Boynes User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (Windows/20050317) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: dev@geronimo.apache.org Subject: Re: API and serialization compatibility, was: Build Failure References: <530E1479-FF80-4059-8FA5-ABC00E41E382@iq80.com> In-Reply-To: <530E1479-FF80-4059-8FA5-ABC00E41E382@iq80.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked X-Spam-Rating: minotaur.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N Dain Sundstrom wrote: > Tim, > > 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. > The issue is not the implementation (serialization vs. XML) but the compatibility of the information set between versions. As David Jencks has pointed out elsewhere, we do not need every project to commit to serialization stability everywhere, just in the classes that are being used in GBean attributes. If they do great; if they don't we just don't use those classes as attribute values and handle reconstruction ourselves. And after all, one requirement Sun place on a JavaBean is that it is Serializable. -- Jeremy