+1 On 4/23/07, Hiram Chirino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
This sounds good to me. On 4/23/07, Timothy Bish <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hey Guys > > This morning I was starting to look at submitting the openwire > generation classes from ActiveMQ-CPP into the openwire generator when a > thought occurred to me and I wanted to run the idea by you guys to see > what you thought. > > Currently all the projects that have openwire generator scripts place > all their openwire generator scripts in the activemq-openwire-genertor > artifact. So for instance there are java classes in the Openwire > generator artifact for the Openwire-CPP project that has now be moved to > the sandbox as nobody is maintaining it. So it seems to me like it > would probably be better to have the projects themselves create an > artifact that is dependent on the activemq-openwire-generator artifact > and include their own Openwire Generation classes there, making use of > the base functionality provided in the current package. > > So I was thinking that I'd have ActiveMQ-CPP create an artifact called > activemqcpp-openwire-generator which was dependent on the > activemq-openwire-generator and then use that in our main pom.xml as the > dependency for the ant task we currently have in place. This way the > code specific to the Project for generating the Openwire classes would > live and die with its own project, not with the main ActiveMQ > distribution. This way when a project like the Openwire-CPP one for > example stops being supported, its openwire scripts don't hang around in > the activemq openwire generator artifact. > > What do you guys think? > > Regards > Tim. > -- Regards, Hiram Blog: http://hiramchirino.com
