OK. Thats all I really want to do - although in the future I might want to
bundle the xmlbeans/jibx databinding as well.

Do the attributes on <plugin> even matter then?

- Dan

On 4/11/07, James Mao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Hi Dan,

Make sure my point is clear

I'm OK to bundle the jaxws/jaxb as a default tool plugin into the single
jar,
Previous plugin description already works in this way.
What i think is <plugins> is a redundant. i think we can safely revert
to previous implementation.

just put one tools-plugin.xml into META-INF dir and include jaxws
frontend and jaxb databinding inside the <plugin> should fit the
requirements.

Cheers,
James.

> Hi Dan,
>
>
>> Hi James,
>>
>> Two quick things before I revert:
>> 1. How would I merge the various <plugin> attributes from the
>> different xml
>> files? i.e. they both have different name attributes. What should I
>> do when
>> combining the different tools.xml into 1 xml file? Or is that
>> attribute not
>> even really used?
>
> To combine is not a good idea, databinding and fronetend they are
> different things, if you take a look at the svn log, i did it before,
> it's looks like this:
> <plugin name="cxf.default" provider="cxf.apache.org">
>   <frontend name="jaxws">
>    ...
>  </frontend>
>  <databinding name="jaxb">
>  ...
>  </databinding>
> </plugin>
>
> it works, but i think it's not good, so i separated, and keep every
> part independent with each other. and also move the plugin description
> into META-INF dir.
>
> The plugin node actually just a wrap element, what really we care is
> the frontend  and databinding inside the element.
>
>> 2. You'll still be able to use the tools separated, but as we agreed
>> on the
>> mailing list, it'd be great if we could produce a cxf.jar with
>> everything,
>> including the tools modules so users only need to manage one jar.
>
> It's ok to have a single jar, but i don't think we need put the
> plugins inside the jar, that does not make much sense to me.
> Take eclipse as an example, you can have a core eclipse, but other
> extensions are independent jars, you can download from eclipse/plugins
>
> I would suggest that we pack Common/Api/Rt/ToolCore    and keep the
> plugins out side of the single jar, just like you are not going to put
> the codegen plugins/ eclipse plugins/ jdee plugins inside the single
> jar, right?
>
> For your reference
>
> Cheers,
> James.
>




--
Dan Diephouse
Envoi Solutions
http://envoisolutions.com | http://netzooid.com/blog

Reply via email to