karaf-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Andreas Pieber <anpie...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [PROPOSAL] Make "simple bean" objects in Karaf Serializable
Date Thu, 25 Aug 2011 06:37:59 GMT
Basically they do it to store the sessions. It isn't as bad as it may sounds
since services are typically retrieved via e.g spring and your jpa daos are
serializable anyhow.

It is only a little bit bad for us since we do not have fully control as you
would typically have over most objects in your app. Nevertheless it's still
not so bad since only the presentation objects have to be serializable.

The biggest problem is mostly to get the wicket Paradigma and write your
code according to it.

Kind regards Andreas
On Aug 25, 2011 8:27 AM, "David Jencks" <david_jencks@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Aug 24, 2011, at 10:37 PM, Andreas Pieber wrote:
>> Because the karaf-webconsole. Wicket serializes the objects in a session.
> Do you know where there is an explanation of why they do this?
>> The alternative to make them serializable in Karaf is to "expand & store
>> relevant data" in serializable karaf-webconsole objects. This would also
>> possible, but I'm not sure if it isn't easier/better to make those plain
>> java-beans serializable (that's why I put this on discussion :-))
> Knowing more about what the motivation is at wicket would make it easier
for me to think about this..... so far the wicket behavior just seems
bizarre to me but I suppose there must be a good reason. It certainly seems
like a big nuisance to have to write serializable copies of everything.
> thanks
> david jencks
>> Kind regards,
>> Andreas
>> On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 07:27, David Jencks <david_jencks@yahoo.com>
>>> Can you explain why you want this? I think serializable objects usually
>>> lead to nothing but trouble.
>>> thanks
>>> david jencks
>>> On Aug 24, 2011, at 9:00 PM, Andreas Pieber wrote:
>>>> While it is not required for the karaf-webconsole it would still help
>>>> various "simple java bean objects" in Karaf would be serializable. This
>>> is
>>>> not required, but on the other hand I don't consider it bad practice to
>>> make
>>>> objects which should only contain plain values serializable. In
>>> I
>>>> propose (for now at least :-)) to make the following interfaces
>>>> serializable:
>>>> # modified:
>>>> features/core/src/main/java/org/apache/karaf/features/BundleInfo.java
>>>> # modified:
>>>> # modified:
>>>> features/core/src/main/java/org/apache/karaf/features/Feature.java
>>>> WDYT?
>>>> Kind regards,
>>>> Andreas

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message