Re: [Openjmx-devel] [Fwd: JMX work, and CustomerBMPBean]

[Carlos Q. <car...@we...>]

On Tuesday 05 February 2002 23:42, Dmitri Colebatch wrote:
> > On Tuesday 05 February 2002 23:03, Dmitri Colebatch wrote:
> > > sorry about that - fixed in CVS now.
> >
> > Sorry problems again
> > now @openjmx:description extends="" generates a class which doesn't
> > extends anything but it has the extends word
> >
> > like MyServiceMBeanDescription extends
> >
> > @openjmx:description extends="XXX"  generates the right
> >
> > MyServiceMBeanDescription extends XXX
>
> I think thats fair enough, I'm not sure what behaviour you'd prefer -
> perhaps ignore the tag altogether?
Actually now that you mention it, it is a debatable point of view. Then the 
right way to write should be 
@openjmx:description extends="openjmx.MBeanDescriptionAdaptor"  

in case you explicitely need it. That's probably clearer

I'll leave as is and make a release

>
> but really, if someone has said it extends an empty class, then so be it. 
> javac behaves the same way (o:
>
> let me know what you'd like to see, and if its easy, then I have np with
> it.
>
> cheers
> dim