| Anonymous | Login | Signup for a new account | 12-12-2025 13:25 PST |
| Main | My View | View Issues | Change Log | Docs |
| Viewing Issue Advanced Details [ Jump to Notes ] | [ View Simple ] [ Issue History ] [ Print ] | |||||||||||
| ID | Category | Severity | Reproducibility | Date Submitted | Last Update | |||||||
| 0004498 | [Hessian] | minor | always | 04-12-11 11:56 | 04-12-11 11:56 | |||||||
| Reporter | ferg | View Status | public | |||||||||
| Assigned To | ||||||||||||
| Priority | normal | Resolution | open | Platform | ||||||||
| Status | new | OS | ||||||||||
| Projection | none | OS Version | ||||||||||
| ETA | none | Fixed in Version | Product Version | |||||||||
| Product Build | ||||||||||||
| Summary | 0004498: Hessian mapping of class names | |||||||||||
| Description |
(rep by Simon Watson) I'm very new to Hessian and, having got the basic examples working plus reviewed the docs, I have a question - is it possible to pass Java objects via Hessian that implement a common interface, but have different client/server implementations? I'd like to use it for communication between an Android app and a Spring web application. The Java interfaces for objects passed back and forth are shared, but the server-side implementation of them contains additional JPA stuff which I'd rather not have on the Android client side. Is there any way of (de)serializing objects with a neutral name (rather than fully qualified class name), and define a mapping between this and the different implementations on each side? |
|||||||||||
| Steps To Reproduce | ||||||||||||
| Additional Information | ||||||||||||
| Attached Files | ||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||
| There are no notes attached to this issue. |
| Mantis 1.0.0rc3[^]
Copyright © 2000 - 2005 Mantis Group
26 total queries executed. 24 unique queries executed. |