Closed gcooney closed 7 years ago
Happy to submit a PR, if there is interest.
Yes, would be interested since goal (for 2.x... quite possible this will be dropped from 3.x) is to keep ObjectMapper
/ ObjectReader
/ ObjectWriter
JDK serializable.
Great! I'll take a stab sometime in the next day or so and submit a PR. I'll throw a vote for keeping support in 3.x. Specific use case here is that Apache Beam requires transformation steps to be serializable.
@gcooney Ok. Keeping/dropping serializability is up for discussion once 2.9 is done. It's tricky one since it combines practicality (turns out there are many classes that need to be serializable, and even if few require much work it adds up... and is bit fragile) with philosophical (it could be argued it's wrong to make stateful non-data object such as mapper serializable). At the same time, there certainly is a use case of some kind to be able to at least serialize configuration settings in some form -- some way to pass processing settings. These issues do seem most common on streaming data platforms (spark, storm, beam, flink).
Core Jackson has support for serializing ObjectMappers since 2.1. But if you add in the guava module, java serialization no longer works because the guava extensions are not serializable.