A wise old hermit known only as Ara Abrahamian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> once said:
> This discussion is interesting. As in "may you live in interesting times"? > - Something we still don't provide: useful defaults. For example you > should be able to pass a bean source that has no @ejb: tags and get > everything generated. *Everything* generated? But isn't the most likely reason for there being no @ejb: tags that it's legacy code, for which you'd already have everything you want? I don't think it's unreasonable that you have to include some XDoclet tags (e.g. @ejb:bean) in an EJB if you want XDoclet to do anything with it. Plus, if XDoclet ignores classes without any @ejb: tags, I can carry on using <include name="**/*.java"/> for my ejbdoclet fileset even though others are creating EJBs in the same source tree using other tools. Andrew. _______________________________________________ Xdoclet-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xdoclet-devel
