So seems we agree to have only local handling in the api so no serializable ;) Le 27 déc. 2014 11:02, "Anatole Tresch" <[email protected]> a écrit :
> Dear all > i dont think it makes sense to make OropertySource serializable, because > when its a dynamic one there is not much sense in doing so. What I propose > and have implemented is that you created a frozen instance of a source > (containing the scannable parts ), which then is serializable. In most > cases I nevertheless would expect some JSON/xml based format to tranfer > property sources/config remotely ... > Romain Manni-Bucau <[email protected]> schrieb am Sa., 27. Dez. 2014 > um > 10:52: > > > Well it should be but it shouldnt be serialized to let it be injectable. > > Having AppScope or equivalent sounds the main constraint when we ll > > integrate it with IoCs. > > Le 27 déc. 2014 10:45, "Mark Struberg" <[email protected]> a écrit : > > > > > What is the benefit of having all the things Serializable? > > > > > > > > > Usually the configuration will be rebuilt on every node and if > something > > > needs to be serializable then only the configured values. The > > configuration > > > system itself imo doesn't need to be Serializable. And sometimes it's > > even > > > impossible/counter-productive to do so. E.g. sometimes the > configuration > > > differs depending on the cluster node you are on... > > > > > > LieGrue, > > > strub > > > > > >
