[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COMMONSRDF-49?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16361675#comment-16361675
 ] 

ASF GitHub Bot commented on COMMONSRDF-49:
------------------------------------------

Github user stain commented on the issue:

    https://github.com/apache/commons-rdf/pull/43
  
    Picking up this - @ajs6f do you still think we should proceed along those 
lines? I am also reluctant to making the abstract factory (builder) 
serializable, but I can see the reasoning, particularly if you want to use this 
in Hadoop or something where you have a pre-made parser builder and then tell a 
different node to run it.
    
    One thing I feel I need to check more is that there is no reading of the 
now-usually-null fields beyond the getters - I might rename them to make that 
clear.
    
    I have put this PR into upstream branch COMMONSRDF-49 we can contribute to.


> 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
>            Priority: Major
>              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
(v7.6.3#76005)

Reply via email to