Hi, Integrating Robbie's code (jira http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-987) highlights a general problem for testing statically generated types. For example, statically generated classes using Tuscany's SDO M2 implementation are not compatible with the current SDO implementation (in this particular case the org.apache.tuscany.sdo.model.impl.ModelPackageImpl no longer exists).
Further, the specification does not specify how to generate static classes from schemas (it does specify what the resulting classes should looks like, but not how to actually invoke the generator). One option would be to have a maven task that invokes an implementations static generator prior to compiling the code that depends on it, however this doesn't resolve all probems. With Tuscany it is necessary to register static type via the SDOUtil.registerStaticTypes(staticFactory.class) or other method pending jira http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-684. Presumable this is also necessary with other implementations. I'd appreciate people comments on : Whether the CTS should test static SDOs (I believe so) ? This would mean we'd need to be able to delegate to different implementation static class registration mechanisms (some form of adaptor/abstraction layer) Whether Maven'ize the SDO CTS is desired ? How best to allow different implementations to be selected in the pom would be interesting This would also require additional maven plugins to allow different implementation generators to be invoked or additional steps in the pom to directly invoke different generators If not maven we could automate with different ant scripts for different implementations (or have "users" edit a general ant script) The downside of this is that the ant script would need to know the location of the implementation JARs I hope we'd all agree on the first point, but I think the second two could open up some interesting discussions. Many thanks in advance, Dan
