Forcing a clone is the wrong thing to do, but we could introduce a method that would force the parse to complete without creating a bunch of duplicate objects. FWIW, that could be done today by calling toString() rather than clone.
- James Ugo Cei wrote: > > On Oct 8, 2007, at 9:10 PM, Dan Diephouse wrote: > >> I think this test should be disabled for now. I don't think its good >> policy to just leave a failing test in the build. The build should >> *always* build and *always* run the tests IMO. The issue can just be >> marked as a blocker for the release and revisited when time/priorities >> permit. As a user and developer its very frustrating to find a build >> that doesn't work (like the maven build in abdera currently). > > I am always fighting with myself over issues like this one, but in this > case I think you are right, so I've put the workaround in place to make > the test succeed. > > I also agree with Garrett that this should be considered a bug: it's > just too easy for users to fall into it and bang their head against a > wall for a few hours before they realize this is the way the code is > actually supposed to work and implementing the workaround in their own > code. > > OTOH, I don't know how easy this would be to fix: maybe by keeping track > of partially-parsed documents and calling clone() internally when a > modification attempt is detected? Sounds messy. > > Ugo > >
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
