Sure, but it isn't like this problem has no solution. RMI (JRMP or IIOP)
will marshall classes, and surely some enterprising developer will
implement a solution using our very own Repository model (marshall an
"import"+class-name+repository-name back to the originator, or better
yet, to a large centralized repository, etc.).
// Bryan
Stanley M. Ho wrote:
Bryan Atsatt wrote:
And we haven't done so in the spec, either. I think we should.
Query was not declared as Serializable in the spec because it was
unclear if we wanted to allow custom Query implementations and how it
might impact these custom Query implementations.
Now that we have decided to allow custom Query implementations, if we
make the Query serializable, the custom implementations will have to
implement serialization properly, but I think this is still okay.
However, if the query is serialized for it to be sent over the wire to a
remote repository, then its usefulness is pretty much limited to the
default query, because it is very unlikely that the remote repository
will happen to have the custom implementation classes in place for the
remote repository to deserialize the custom query properly.
If the EG still thinks this is a useful thing to add, I can incorporate
it into the next revision of the specification.
- Stanley
