[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COMMONSRDF-49?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16253643#comment-16253643
]
ASF GitHub Bot commented on COMMONSRDF-49:
------------------------------------------
Github user ajs6f commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/commons-rdf/pull/43
I'd like to get @wikier an answer to his question. It sounds like we are
_not_ comfortable merging this for `RC2` and he should go ahead without it,
correct?
If the consensus is that serializable config should be factored out of
`AbstractRDFParser` (and I agree with that approach) than I think we should
close `COMMONSRDF-49` and open a new ticket that is more exact (or edit
`COMMONSRDF-49`) so that @ansell understands what to expect. I don't have the
mojo in Commons RDF's Jira to do that.
> Make AbstractRDFParser serializable
> -----------------------------------
>
> Key: COMMONSRDF-49
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COMMONSRDF-49
> Project: Apache Commons RDF
> Issue Type: New Feature
> Components: simple
> Affects Versions: 0.3.0
> Reporter: Stian Soiland-Reyes
> Assignee: Stian Soiland-Reyes
> Labels: parser
> Fix For: 0.6.0
>
>
> Raised by [~p_ansell] in [pull request
> 25|(https://github.com/apache/incubator-commonsrdf/pull/25#discussion_r85436754]
> {quote}
> The use of optional here as a field type makes it impossible to serialise.
> Need to have the raw values stored in fields if you want to support
> serialisation in the future, which should otherwise be possible.
> {quote}
> The suggestion is to avoid {{Optional}} in the private fields of
> {{AbstractRDFParser}} so it can be serialized - it can still be {{Optional}}
> in the accessor methods.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)
