[Xdoclet-user] Re: [Ejbdoclet-user] merge into ejb-jar.xml

[Jozsa K. <dy...@ka...>]

On Fri, Nov 30, 2001 at 03:05:28PM +1100, Dmitri Colebatch wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> > I'm using XDoclet to generate my META-INF/ description files in a JBoss
> > project. I'd like to use JBoss' AutoNumberFactory class, so I need an
> > <entity>..</entity> entry in my ejb-jar.xml file to be able to use it from
> > my classes properly (if I'm right of course).
> 
> ok - so you already have classes, but you need to have the deployment
> descriptor stuff... so you're not really going to be able to get stuff out
> of the sources are you?  I dont know that we've currently got a solution for
> this....

Errrmm.. so sticking to my end-user-like question, what's the suggested way
of solving this problem? Shall I extract JBoss' AutoNumber bean, and include
it into my sources, adding some XDoclet-headers to the top? Even worse,
rewrite the AutoNumberFactory in my own package? You see, all I need is to
add 6 lines of code into the ejb-jar.xml and it all works. I've tested this
manually including the right lines to the generated descriptor, repackaged
it and it's doing fine..


> > I guess the only solution to generate an ejb-jar entry with XDoclet for a
> > bean which is not included in my source files is to use the merge
> > options..
> 
> these are for where you have source code, but want to write the dd by hand.
> what you have is no source code, and need to include a bit of the dd by hand
> yes?

Yeah okay.. the documentation did not seemed to clear on the target usage of
this feature for me - my fault probably :)

> > So the question is, what's missing from the above situation?
> 
> I think we need to have the ability to add dd for ejbs, at the moment I cant
> see that we have it - Ara?

What about an option with plain merging user-provided xml files into the
generated sources without any additional checking or other logic? Dirty, but
could help.. 

> > ps. I've got xdoclet from cvs to compile with some debug in the merge
> code,
> > but it does not even compile without any modifications.. bad luck :)
> 
> hmmm... thats odd... I just checked - it seems you're right... it was
> compiling last night...   guys?

It does not look serious imho, but it's 05:13AM here so I decided not to
figure out myself :)

Christopher
-- 
.Digital.Yearning.for.Networked.Assassination.and.Xenocide