Nathan,
Yes, there is some harm - someone could change the classes in future and
forget
to change the serialVersionUID. Also adding serialVersionUID implies the
serialization
compatibility is important, which is not the case.
Regards,
Vasily Zakharov
Intel Middleware Products Division
-Orig
ad to discuss how we can help improve
the
rmi package; I'll wait for your comments on that.
Thanks
Daniel
- Original Message -
From: "Zakharov, Vasily M" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Wednesday, August 02, 2006 12:48 PM
Subject: RE: [classlib] resolution of rmi/math/cr
Daniel,
Thank you very much for your work!
Here are my "fixit"s to the doc:
# Intel RMI
This package complies with J2SE 1.4.2 specification. Interoperability
with RI has been taken into care (through an intensive and exhaustive
wire protocol analysis); package has proved to be interoperable wit
Great idea!
I'm trying to run Apache Geronimo (it's a J2EE 1.4 certified application
server, http://geronimo.apache.org) on Harmony VM/classlib. Geronimo
starts (mostly) successfully, but a number of important issues does
exist. It seems that those issues could be good candidates to
"App-Oriented
> could we run Geronimo without CORBA?
No, we can't for now, but we'll can when Geronimo 1.1 is out, which is
gonna happen pretty soon.
Geronimo 1.1 is promised to work without CORBA.
Vasily Zakharov
Intel Middleware Products Division
-Original Message-
From: Stefano Mazzocchi [mailto
"At the end we are going to dump any logging debris that have any
performance or other burden like increase in dependencies"
It's Open Source. There's no "end". The bugs will continue to get found,
and new features and optimizations will appear from time to time.
And putting them in would requir
a that our classlibraries might yammer out to stdout or logging
infrastructure to the surprise of the users....
geir
Zakharov, Vasily M wrote:
> Tim,
>
> I see your point of removing extra inter-dependencies between the
> modules,
> however I'm surprized by the idea of re
Tim,
I see your point of removing extra inter-dependencies between the
modules,
however I'm surprized by the idea of removing dependencies on Logging.
Logging is a package specifically created to organize and structurize
logging and debugging output, and I see using it as a good side of
implement
, May 22, 2006 10:25 PM
To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [jira] Commented: (HARMONY-337) Contribution of RMI
framework
On 22 May 2006 at 21:20, "Zakharov, Vasily M"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> By the way, if "rmi2" module is ITC donation and &q
vision
-Original Message-
From: Vasily Zakharov (JIRA) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, May 22, 2006 9:02 PM
To: Zakharov, Vasily M
Subject: [jira] Commented: (HARMONY-337) Contribution of RMI framework
[
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-337?page=comments#action
on specific; they were developed against
the
RI and all of them are supposed to work fine with RI. I believe the
issue is due to the jre version you are using, remember that we have
always assumed Sun's J2SE 5.0 as the RI.
Daniel
- Original Message -----
From: "Zakharov, Vasily
el
> - Original Message -----
> From: "Zakharov, Vasily M" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To:
> Sent: Friday, May 05, 2006 3:33 PM
> Subject: RE: [rmi] package comparison
>
>
> Daniel,
>
> I was going to run your tests against our implementation, and it
ad or set of applications that represent a "real" use of rmi
package. I see a big challenge here...
I'll wait for your comments,
Daniel
- Original Message -----
From: "Zakharov, Vasily M" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Friday, April 14, 2006 1:17 PM
Subject: RE
to run against
the packages in order to measure performance. I see a similar
discusion taking place at java.math, since they also have to compare
two implementations.
please comment on each, and add/remove if I'm missing something.
Thanks,
Daniel
- Original Message ---
our
implememtation behaved differently than the RI.
Vasily
-Original Message-
From: Daniel Gandara [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, April 21, 2006 1:17 AM
To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [rmi] package comparison (was Re: Contribution of RMI
framework)
Zakharov, Vasil
and the architecture behind it; I'm sure you did it in order to
"design" the package before coding it, but its ok if you do
not have them handy.
Daniel
----- Original Message -
From: "Zakharov, Vasily M" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2006
you do have further information/description of the JRMP protocol
please send it ot me, since it will be very usefull.
- Original Message -
From: "Zakharov, Vasily M" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Tuesday, April 18, 2006 2:57 PM
Subject: RE: [rmi] package comparison (was
formance analysis
> on RMI is not a trivial task; I'll coordinate with him the best way to
> compare the packages.
>
> Daniel
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Zakharov, Vasily M" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To:
> Sent: Friday, April 14, 2006 1:17
e before contributing it, so I guess one way to
move further is to cross run test cases (you run ours and we run
yours). What do you think?
c) performance analysis and comparison
I believe the first step here is to get along about which is the
workload or set of applications that represen
s someone out there who has also
> been working on rmi; I believe we'll have a lot to share and discuss
> about it.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Daniel
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Zakharov, Vasily M" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To:
> Sent: Wednesday
t: Re: Contribution of RMI framework
Cool!
How does this compare to the other RMI framework that also has been
donated? Any thoughts?
geir
Zakharov, Vasily M wrote:
> Hi, all,
>
> I would like to announce the next code contribution to Harmony project
> on
> behalf of Intel corporatio
armony-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Contribution of RMI framework
Vasily,
good to know that there is someone out there who has also
been working on rmi; I believe we'll have a lot to share and discuss
about it.
Thanks,
Daniel
- Original Message -
From: &quo
Hi, all,
I would like to announce the next code contribution to Harmony project
on
behalf of Intel corporation. This contribution contains the
implementation
of RMI framework.
The archive with this contribution can be found at:
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-337
The Remote Method
> - Original Message -
> From: "Magnusson, Geir" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Thursday, February 2, 2006 7:52 pm
> Subject: RE: FYI: 100+ files do not fully comply with serialVersionUID
spec
>
>> We look forward to a patch. :)
>>
>> -Original
Hello, all,
There're some classes in API library that are Serializable and have
serialVersionUIDs, but those serialVersionUIDs are not marked private as
recommended by Serialization Specification. The full proper signature
for serialVersionUID is 'private static final long', unless the API
specifi
25 matches
Mail list logo
