You're correct, there are other ways to annotate an RA which can't be
duplicated in ra.xml, and I didn't mean to make that the focus of the
question. The point was, when the required-config-property element was
added to the spec, it appears to have been intentionally limited to the
AS javabean. When we deprecated the xml element in favor of @NotNull,
we didn't apply that same limitation to the annotative version, was
that intentional. Ie, does it make sense to allow RA developers to
declare config properties for other RA javabean types as mandatory?
Fred