On Tue, Aug 5, 2008 at 9:33 AM, Marcel Reutegger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > > does anyone remember why ItemStates are serializable? It seems they are > never actually serialized directly. Instead we use the Serializer utility > class that serializes the individual parts an ItemState consists of. > > maintaining backward compatibility for serializable classes is quite > painful. If we don't actually use it I suggest we drop it.
-10000! ...just kidding ;) serializability of ItemState's is a leftover from jackrabbit's humble beginnings where ItemState instances were persisted in the file system using standard java object serialization. a while ago i also toyed around with ehcache for allowing jackrabit's internal itemstate caches to overflow to disk (which required itemstates to be serializable). it turned out that it's possible with jackrabbit's current model. +1 for dropping it cheers stefan > > regards > marcel >
