On Aug 25, 2007, at 5:37 AM, Mohammad Nour El-Din wrote:
On 8/25/07, David Blevins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I was thinking the input would have to be the complete archive as we
might need to inspect the classes to figure out methods and whatnot.
Working backwards from the jaxb tree seems pretty straight forward.
And I guess unless we use ASM we'd need a set of objects to build up
as we go, which would also be a fine alternative as there really
aren't that many annotations an ASM can be complicated. Anyone have
any thoughts?
I think this is related to Eclipse plugin of OpenEJB, I think it is
better
to provide this facility to the EJB developers, that is when they have
a 2.1EJB and want to migrate it to EJB
3.0. the tool will modify the Java files and/or the DD to migrate the
2.1EJB into a version 3.0 EJB.
An Eclipse plugin that could update their actual source is certainly
a cool idea :) Very powerful indeed. I don't know anything about
that world so I'd definitely also like to do a simple version that
just kind of communicates "here are the annotations you can add and
here is where they go."
Perhaps for the core of it we can come up with a simple data model
that could be then used by both tools. Maybe something simple like
mutable class versions of the annotations themselves.
-David
