Doesn't it provide the xjc that was removed from JDK11?
It looks like development has stopped here:
https://github.com/highsource/maven-jaxb2-plugin

I see the issue though https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CXFXJC-11
The input for xjc is a file OR a directory, so there shouldn't be a
separate tag for this.
The cxf-xjc-plugin is processing my entire xsd directory 128x, which is the
number of schema in the directory.

Thanks,
Delany


On Thu, 30 Sept 2021 at 12:45, Mantas Gridinas <mgridi...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Does cxf-xjc do anything more than the regular plugin? I've been migrating
> projects into the opposite direction instead lately.
>
> On Thu, Sep 30, 2021, 11:44 Delany <delany.middle...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> > I'm attempting to replace maven-jaxb2-plugin with cxf-xjc-plugin
> (v3.3.1).
> >
> > The documentation on this plugin is a single page
> > https://cxf.apache.org/cxf-xjc-plugin.html
> > There seems to be undocumented option <xsdDir>
> > I've got a directory with 128 schemas so obviously don't want to use
> <xsd>
> >
> >             <execution>
> >               <id>xjc</id>
> >               <goals>
> >                 <goal>xsdtojava</goal>
> >               </goals>
> >               <phase>none</phase>
> >               <configuration>
> >
> > <sourceRoot>${project.build.directory}/generated-sources</sourceRoot>
> >                 <xsdOptions>
> >                   <xsdOption>
> >                     <extensionArgs>-Xinheritance</extensionArgs>
> >                     <extension>true</extension>
> >
> > <xsdDir>${project.basedir}/src/main/resources/xsd</xsdDir>
> >                   </xsdOption>
> >                 </xsdOptions>
> >                 <extensions>
> >
> >
> >
> <extension>org.jvnet.jaxb2_commons:jaxb2-basics:${dep.org.jvnet.jaxb2_commons.jaxb2-basics}</extension>
> >                 </extensions>
> >               </configuration>
> >             </execution>
> >
> > Using the maven-jaxb2-plugin the project takes 10s to build. With
> > cxf-xjc-plugin is takes 96s. What's going on?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Delany
> >
>

Reply via email to