On 8/24/05, Chad Brandon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I don't think using Maven goals to handle it > is appropriate...that means AndroMDA becomes dependant on Maven...it > should be in the cartridge descriptor....AndroMDA should be embeddedable > in any java tool. I agree, let's use the cartridge descriptor.
> I do like your suggestion a lot better than the > interface approach, that means any java class could be a transformer. True, any *new* Java class would also be usable in Matthias' interface approach but an adapter would be needed for existing transformation classes (or new classes generated by closed-source transformation generators). Does anybody see whether we're overlooking advantages of the interface approach (or disadvantages of the plain Java approach)? Kind regards, Pieter. ------------------------------------------------------- SF.Net email is Sponsored by the Better Software Conference & EXPO September 19-22, 2005 * San Francisco, CA * Development Lifecycle Practices Agile & Plan-Driven Development * Managing Projects & Teams * Testing & QA Security * Process Improvement & Measurement * http://www.sqe.com/bsce5sf
