I added Malachi as a developer of the plugin. He should now have a
commit access. I also added you both to the jaxb project as content
developer so that you can touch www/
I posted activation.jar and jsr173_1.0_api.jar in the JAXB maven
repository, too.
Jonathan Johnson wrote:
> It appeared the XJC2Task had a simpler interface. Also, we are considering
> using the ant xjc configuration xml block. I was also concerned that
> Kohsuke had logic in there that was not in Driver that the Maven plugin
> would need as well. It appeared Driver was the common interface point for a
> plugin such as this and I have no problem using that instead. It would
> remove the ant dependency from the maven plugin which would be nice. I'm
> just concerned about loosing functionality and complicating the plugin code
> and ensuring future updates are not too painful.
If we decide not to (or if it turns out impossible to) reuse the ant
syntax, we can think about
> question and there are definite merits. Two technical roadblocks are 1)
> Maven does not make it obvious on how to get the raw configuration block.
> (Their documentation just talks about mapped configuration to the plugin
> java objects, but I'm sure there is a way) 2) XJC2Task does not have a
> method to submit the xml configuration section.
We've solved (2) already in JAXB, so there's no problem doing that, but
I need to investigate about (1).
> You guys know the configuration better than me. If its not more complex
> that what is on http://java.sun.com/webservices/docs/1.6/jaxb/ant.html then
> why not use the ant syntax. I used this document to create the current
> configuration settings. Are the current settings significantly different
> than the ant ones? Did I miss any features? Kohsuke did have a good point
> that if the configuration block was just passed through to XJC2Task then
> future features would be automatically added. I'm flexible.
The ant syntax hasn't change too much since 1.0. The latest can be seen
in
https://jaxb.dev.java.net/jaxb20-ea3/docs/xjcTask.html
>> Do people need to specify jaxb-xjc as the dependency? I thought only the
> plugin depends on jaxb-xjc and not user app.
> This is why I don't quit my day job. You are correct the only the plugin
> depends on jaxb-xjc. I will reflect this in the documentation.
:-)
>> Also, I wonder if it's possible for us to define an m2 repository on
> java.net so that jaxb-impl can specify a transitive dependency to jaxb api
> and etc.
>
> That would be nice to put things here
> https://maven-repository.dev.java.net/nonav/repository/. Reducing the
> amount of required dependencies is important. I believe all that has to be
> done is adding these to the poms on the repository. I noticed the poms are
> not in the java.net repository. I also noticed that the instructions on
> https://maven-repository.dev.java.net/ are for maven 1, not maven 2.
> Perhaps there is some java.net maven 2 prerequisite work to fulfill this
> transitive dependency goal.
I need to think about what it takes to extend maven-repository and
maven-javanet-plugin to support m2. One more thing to learn...
>> Also, we should think about how to upload your plugin to the maven
> repository.
>
> Once we get a stable version with concise instructions lets publish it there
> too.
OK.
--
Kohsuke Kawaguchi
Sun Microsystems kohsuke.kawaguchi_at_sun.com