[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CONFIGURATION-203?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12701823#action_12701823
]
Ralph Goers commented on CONFIGURATION-203:
-------------------------------------------
Frankly, I don't really understand how having a Configuration being
Serializable is particularly useful and the complexity involved in this seems
to be way out of proportion with the benefit.
In the case of a CompositeConfiguration that would mean serializing all the
configurations that participate and then including them in the serialized
composite. What is the benefit vs creating a new Composite using the
configurations that make it up. In the case of DefaultConfigurationBuilder,
which is an "extended" XMLConfiguration, the serialized form of this would be
extremely complex. Some of this could be mitigated by having the serialized
form embed the initial configuration file used by DefaultConfigurationBuilder
and marking the fields transient, but if you do that why not just go the whole
route and have it build a new CombinedConfiguration?
And what would be the point of storing an XML serialized format of the
Configuration when the configuration data itself is an XML document? That is
just seems silly.
> Make Configuration Serializable
> -------------------------------
>
> Key: CONFIGURATION-203
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CONFIGURATION-203
> Project: Commons Configuration
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Affects Versions: 1.1
> Reporter: Joe Wolf
> Priority: Minor
> Fix For: 1.7
>
>
> It would be nice if org.apache.commons.configuration.Configuration extended
> java.io.Serializable and its implementations were serializable as well.
> Theoretically, most configurations are constructed from "serialized" data
> sources.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
