hi,
As mentioned before, I posted a suggest to Jire for a generic way to support
vendor extension. as in:
http://opensource.atlassian.com/projects/xdoclet/secure/ViewIssue.jspa?key=X
DT-332
I just checked back and see the following reply:
~quote~
Mathias Bogaert [ 27/Feb/03 ]
This is a vendor specific thing, and out-of-scope for XDoclet 1.2. For
XDoclet 2.0, we do NOT support vendor specific tags anymore, this is the
resp of the vendor.
~end quote~
Thanks for the prompt reply first, but I think there is either some
misunderstanding for me to this message, or the person who make this
decision have some misunderstanding on the vendor extension tag of JDO. (I
really mean "misunderstanding", please read on) Vendor extension is
basically specified as a part of the JDO specification. Currently, XDoclet
supports JDO vendor extension by making specific modules for each vendor
(open source or commercial). Implement in this way has pro and con. For pro,
it's good as there is validation. For con, it's not flexible enough as it
requires some works for each vendor. I think Mathias' message is refer to
this.
However, Sebastian's proposal is not like this. (and I think it's a great
idea) Let me make it clear by giving the code. XDoclet is going to generate
sth similar to the following:
<extension vendor-name="aaa" key="bbb" value="ccc"/>
current, it is specifed by:
/**
* @jdo.field
* default-fetch-group="true"
* null-value="exception"
* (the above is for reference, vendor extension is in the following
line!)
* @tjdo.field column-length="50"
*/
and we propose to make it as
/**
* ...
* @jdo.extension vendor="tjdo" name="column-length" value="50"
*/
(or whatever similar)
So, it supports vendor extension *in another way*, a generic way. And no
vendor specific module is required. I originally want to submit a patch
myself, as it's really simple. But from the email, it seems Sebastian has
done it already! (thank you, Sebastian!!!)
I am pretty sure XDoclet is not really going to abandon the support for
vendor extension, as it is a tool for the developer! If it doesn't support
vendor extension, it means we can't use XDoclet without manual works to
modify the descriptor, which is a nightmare as we love and addicted to
XDoclet already! :-)
What do you think?
Regards,
mingfai
-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf
_______________________________________________
xdoclet-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xdoclet-devel
