From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Robin Rosenberg Subject: Re: [JGIT PATCH] 1/2 : (reworked) Externalizable/Serializable Items Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2009 21:59:50 +0100 Message-ID: <200902182159.51027.robin.rosenberg.lists@dewire.com> References: <320075ff0902161212s1980cd70r8cdc4c21550333ee@mail.gmail.com> <20090218163002.GB22848@spearce.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Nigel Magnay , Git ML To: "Shawn O. Pearce" X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Feb 18 22:01:46 2009 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1LZtXz-0000r8-TM for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Wed, 18 Feb 2009 22:01:36 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753439AbZBRVAF (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Feb 2009 16:00:05 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753081AbZBRVAE (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Feb 2009 16:00:04 -0500 Received: from mail.dewire.com ([83.140.172.130]:22554 "EHLO dewire.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751615AbZBRVAB (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Feb 2009 16:00:01 -0500 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dewire.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84711147E98E; Wed, 18 Feb 2009 21:59:55 +0100 (CET) X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at dewire.com Received: from dewire.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (torino.dewire.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id RW8P7TFZ03ft; Wed, 18 Feb 2009 21:59:55 +0100 (CET) Received: from sleipner.localnet (unknown [10.9.0.3]) by dewire.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E68E4147E89D; Wed, 18 Feb 2009 21:59:54 +0100 (CET) User-Agent: KMail/1.11.0 (Linux/2.6.27-11-generic; KDE/4.2.0; i686; ; ) In-Reply-To: <20090218163002.GB22848@spearce.org> Content-Disposition: inline Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Shawn wrote: > > + os.writeUTF(KEY_FETCH); > > + os.writeUTF(refspec.toString()); > > + } > > + > > + for (RefSpec refspec : push) { > > + os.writeUTF(KEY_PUSH); > > + os.writeUTF(refspec.toString()); > > + } > > Should we maybe allow RefSpec to serialize itself with > os.writeObject() rather than using writeUTF() directly? Doesn't the style above make it easy to define and document a format that is easy for non-java programs to write and read, while writeObject introduces java-centric stuff (depending on the full class name etc). -- robin