Hello! I think I have seen an answer to this question before, but I can't seem to find it in the mailinligs. Anyway, first question: If an abstract class implements the Serviceable interface and there exists an @avalon.dependency type="xxx" in the abstract class, the .xinfo file is generated only for a class which extends the abstract class. The .xinfo file is not generated for an additional class that extends the abstract class, but is placed in another package.
Is it a bug or a feature that the .xinfo file is not generated for the abstract class, but for the class that implements it? If it is a feature, shouldn't all classes that extends from the abstract class get generated .xinfo files? The second question is about lifecycle extensions: Is there a way to define the "execution" order of the lifecycles, e.g. via dependencies or configuration? Yep, that's it for now :) /Tobias
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
