> Do we call it --all or --emitAll? I prefer --all for > brevity. Neither "a" > nor "e" have been used in the shorthand version of any other > option, so we > have no restrictions there.
+1 for --all > What is the relationship between --all and --noImports? We can say a > couple things: > 1. --all supercedes --noImports > 2. --all refers to elements in the immediate WSDL file but > not in imported > files. > I think I prefer #2. I think --all simply means "don't track references, just generate everything in scope", where "in scope" is defined as per usual. If you follow imports and --all is specified, you should generate everything everywhere. > If there are unused types that are generated by --all, then > do those types > go into deploy.wsdd? I would say no since the service itself > doesn't use > those types. But that would make the code a whole lot more > complex. (I'd > still say no, but I'd grumble as I implement it!) I see no reason not to put the mappings into the deploy.wsdd if the types get generated. At the very worst, this means a few unused <typeMappings> which can be copied and pasted into other deployment descriptors quite easily when/if those types get used in other contexts. --Glen
