Stefano Bagnara wrote:
> I just confirmed that James 2.2.0 and James 2.3.0rc3 have the same
> serialversionuid: 6323959976390389529L;
> So we have to add this to trunk
+1
--- Noel
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PR
> the default *serialVersionUID* computation is highly sensitive to class
> details that may vary depending on compiler implementations, and can
> thus result in unexpected |InvalidClassException|s during
> deserialization. Therefore, to guarantee a consistent *serialVersionUID*
> value across diff
Stefano Bagnara schrieb:
I checked the history for DefaultJamesUser and it doesn't seem to have
changed interface/signatures since 2.2.0 (apart the last initialize
removal). So 2.3.0RCs and 2.2.0 should have the same SerialVersionUIDs
and only trunk after 16 Sep is different: am I wrong?
If s
Stefano Bagnara schrieb:
Norman Maurer wrote:
Im almost sure we are in big trouble now.. Cause if i change the
SerialVersionUID to the same as in 2.2.0 we will break the
userrepositories of the users which start using james with 2.3.0x .
If i use the SerialVersionUID of 2.3.0x we have the same
Norman Maurer wrote:
Im almost sure we are in big trouble now.. Cause if i change the
SerialVersionUID to the same as in 2.2.0 we will break the
userrepositories of the users which start using james with 2.3.0x .
If i use the SerialVersionUID of 2.3.0x we have the same problem with
users of 2.2
