On Tue, 30 Oct 2001, [iso-8859-1] Aslak Helles�y wrote: > ejbdoclet's strutsform subtask generates org.apache.struts.action.ActionForm > implementations. > webdoclet's strutsconfigxml subtask generates struts-config.xml from > org.apache.struts.action.ActionForm implementations and > org.apache.struts.action.Action implementations. > > I guess the intention here is to hand-edit ejbdoclet-generated ActionForm > and add @struts:form name="whatever" tags before running webdoclet. This > breaks the continuous integration loop. If the entity bean is modified, the > ActionForm is regenerated, and we have to add the struts tags manually > again.
my intention had been that you would subclass the generated form, adding the required @struts:form comment, that way not breaking the continuous integration. Its a pretty ordinary workaround really, but its all I could come up with. Ara and I exchanged more than a few emails about it at the time... I've found a couple: http://www.mail-archive.com/xdoclet-devel%40lists.sourceforge.net/msg00263.html http://www.mail-archive.com/xdoclet-devel%40lists.sourceforge.net/msg00265.html http://www.mail-archive.com/xdoclet-devel%40lists.sourceforge.net/msg00266.html > I have added a default tag to the generated ActionForm. A fooBar Entity Bean > would get the form name "fooBarForm". > Comments? I think this "double" generation is a bit weird :-) yes - definately agreed... a bit weird. Does the explanation of subclassing the generated form make it any less weird? I think it makes it weirder, but a little more workable. I dont like the double generation, but I suppose that's happening anyway isn't it... I'd be keen to get a better solution... but at the time I was all out of ideas, and haven't thought of any since... cheers dim _______________________________________________ Xdoclet-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xdoclet-devel
