Thanks for the thorough reply,

We don't need to add a new Marshaller as we just added a field to the
AssemblyInfo and then subsequently used it in the
DefaultAssemblyInfoMarshaller.  I was just browsing through the classes and
noticed that they write essentially the same info in a different format.
Since we were adding a new field to AssemblyInfo and the default marshaller,
I was wondering if we should add that field to the VB and the Java
marshaller as well.

Thanks,
Evan

On 5/7/07, Shane Isbell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Hi Evan,

It looks as though you are digging into the internals, which is good. Both
Java and VB are supported languages. You won't find a compile-time
dependency within the code. Take a look under
dotnet-core/src/main/resources/ META-INF/nmaven for the config files. The
way the loading works is that the the plexus container is configured to
load
the registry-config.xml file (check the RepositoryRegistryImpl initialize
method). The Registry then passes the assembly-plugins config to the
org.apache.maven.dotnet.assembler.impl.AssemblyPluginsRepository, which in
turns dynamically instantiates the
org.apache.maven.dotnet.assembler.impl.VBAssemblyInfoMarshaller and
org.apache.maven.dotnet.assembler.impl.JavaAssemblyInfoMarshaller classes.

The DefaultAssemblyInfoMarshaller is final and is not meant to be
extended. It should be used by those languages that support the common
bracket notation for the attributes. If a language uses a different
notation, then the developer should create a new implementation of the
AssemblyInfoMarshaller interface. Given this, if you are adding new
information to the DefaultAssemblyInfoMarshaller, it won't require a
change
for VB and Java, unless you change the AssemblyInfoMarshaller interface,
which should not be required since you can just add new accessor/mutator
methods to the AssemblyInfo class itself.

Regards,
Shane


On 5/7/07, Evan Worley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I have a question about VBAssemblyInfoMarshaller and
> JavaAssemblyInfoMarshaller.  I noticed that neither of these classes are
> used, and they don't extend DefaultAssemblyInfoMarshaller, which
provides
> much of the implementation in the VB and Java assembly info marshallers.
>
> If these classes aren't planned to be used, can they be deleted?  If
there
> are planned to be used, perhaps they should extend
> DefaultAssemblyInfoMarshaller?  We are adding the use of the
> AssemblyInformationalVersion to the default marshaller and don't want to
> repeat this in the VB and Java marshaller if it is not necessary.
>
> Thanks,
> Evan
>

Reply via email to