On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 3:48 AM, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 25 July 2012 07:54, Jörg Schaible <joerg.schai...@scalaris.com> wrote: >> sebb wrote: >> >>> On 24 July 2012 09:11, Jörg Schaible <joerg.schai...@scalaris.com> wrote: >>>> Hi Elijah, >>>> >>>> Elijah Zupancic wrote: >>>> >>>>> Thanks Jörg! >>>>> >>>>> It sounds like we will need to change them all in chain because we >>>>> have changed the package name. >>>> >>>> Well, since they are all different objects now, the Java runtime will not >>>> try to match them anyway, so it is for this special case not really >>>> required. >>> >>> +1 >>> >>> >>>> However, if you consider a change, I'd like to propose to use everywhere >>>> a constant that reflects the day of change: >>>> >>>> servialVersionUID = 20120724L; // format YYYYMMDD >>>> >>>> It's easier then to keep track of changes. >>> >>> +0 >>> >>> Ideally the svuid is only changed when necessary. >>> I don't think the id should be updated just because a new method was >>> added, or code was updated. >>> >>> The danger with using the date is that maintainers may update the id >>> whenever the source is updated. >> >> I did not say that. > > I know; but the fact that the id is a date may (mis)lead maintainers > into updating it too often. > > If we do decide to use the day, maybe it should have a comment such as: > > // YYYYMMDD date of last change to serialized form. > >> - Jörg >>
Since the serialized form will never change without a release, the svuid could also be aligned to the component version. Thanks, Brent --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
