Am Dienstag 15 Mai 2012, 23:25:46 schrieb Gilles Sadowski:
> Hello.
>
> > as I am also interested in short term serialization just for moving
> > objects between a distributed virtual machines and not in long term
> > serialization, I would support the discussion up to now. To express our
> > intentions we could make an interface, say
> >
> > public interface Transportable extends Serializable { }
> >
> > and then implement this interface when ever containers should be short
> > term serializable. This interface could then also document our
> > intentions. And this would then allow the usage of CM in a distributed
> > setting.
>
> I like the idea of finding something in order to make it clear what the
> intention is. However, I don't see what we would gain with this new
> interface.
> Maybe I'm missing something.
I think of such an interface as a workaround: there are good reasons for
implementing Serializable and good reasons for to not implement it. So the
people which need some classes to be usable in a distributed setting could be
satisfied without putting the burden of implementing Serializable with its
full contract to the developers.
Best regards,
Heinz
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
