DO NOT REPLY [Bug 37727] - [resources] Fix serializability contracts

[bu...@apache.org]

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG�
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
<http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37727>.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND�
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37727





------- Additional Comments From niallp@apache.org  2005-12-01 02:11 -------
Sorry Rahul, from an initial scan of the source code I disagree with your 
analysis for five out of eight of the classes on your list.

I see nothing in  BasicMessage, BasicMessageList, CollectionsResourceBase, 
ResourceFactoryBase or XMLResources that would prevent these classes from being 
serializable. They all implement (directly or indirectly) the Serializable 
interface and their instance variables are either primitives or classes which 
implement Serializable. Perhaps you could indicate what brings you to your 
conclusion?

I agree with you on the others:

1) ResourcesBundlesResources uses ClassLoader as a key which is not 
serializable and stores java.util.ResourceBundle which is also not Serializable.

2) None of the Webapp classes are Serialiazable because they store the 
ServletContext which is not Serializable.

I haven't put much thought into the two above cases, but I can't at this point 
see a solution to make these Serializable. Comments/suggestions welcome.


-- 
Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org