On Mon, 29 Oct 2001, Andrew Stevens wrote: > 472759 - OK. With @ejb:bean generate="false" the BMP class isn't generated > any more, but the other files are.
which other files? is that a good thing then, or are you saying (as I suspect) that the ejb-jar.xml et al reference a now non-existant class? > 472764 - not okay. With @ejb:bean generate="false" the template assumes > the EJB is an abstract one and not to be included in the DD (so instead of > getting the wrong class name, now I get nothing at all). In fact, it's > entirely the reverse situation; the reason I don't want it generated is > because it's a concrete BMP implementation rather than the abstract Bean > class XDoclet wants... > > Perhaps as well as the generate parameter, we need another one (e.g. > deploy="true|false", default = true) for whether or not a bean should be > included in the DD. That way, if it really is an abstract EJB there's a > way to exclude it from the DD, but that's independent of whether we're > generating the BMP/CMP/Session class for it. hmmm.. yeah, so we have two scenarios: 1) I have a base class that I have some common functionality in - this shouldn't have a subclass generated, and should not be in the dd 2) I have a bmp entity that I done want a subclass generated for - this shouldn't have a subclass generated, but should be in the dd. so you're proposing something like: @ejb:bean generate="false" deploy="true" what should deploy default to if generate is false and deploy is absent? cheers dim _______________________________________________ Xdoclet-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xdoclet-devel
