Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-ws-axis-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 95645 invoked from network); 18 Feb 2004 19:52:39 -0000 Received: from daedalus.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (208.185.179.12) by minotaur-2.apache.org with SMTP; 18 Feb 2004 19:52:39 -0000 Received: (qmail 22252 invoked by uid 500); 18 Feb 2004 19:52:25 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-ws-axis-dev-archive@ws.apache.org Received: (qmail 22223 invoked by uid 500); 18 Feb 2004 19:52:25 -0000 Mailing-List: contact axis-dev-help@ws.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk Reply-To: axis-dev@ws.apache.org list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Delivered-To: mailing list axis-dev@ws.apache.org Received: (qmail 22212 invoked from network); 18 Feb 2004 19:52:25 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO p01mgw01.macromedia.com) (216.104.212.90) by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 18 Feb 2004 19:52:25 -0000 Received: from S1001EXM02.macromedia.com ([10.4.48.132]) by p01mgw01.macromedia.com (Switch-3.1.4/Switch-3.1.0) with ESMTP id i1IJq4v9019218; Wed, 18 Feb 2004 11:52:05 -0800 (PST) Received: by S1001EXM02.macromedia.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2657.72) id ; Wed, 18 Feb 2004 14:52:04 -0500 Message-ID: From: Tom Jordahl To: "'axis-dev@ws.apache.org'" Cc: "'Jim Stafford'" Subject: RE: Support needed for conditional stub/skeleton generation Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2004 14:52:03 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2657.72) Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N X-Spam-Rating: minotaur-2.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N Jim, Wouldn't this be implemented as a switch to the command line WSDL2Java? --nobeans - turns off generation of JavaBeans for Schema types. This would prevent us from generating code that you don't want. Many users generate code in a directory, and then copy only the classes they want and need to their build directories. This gives maximum control over what generated artifacts are used. I seem to be missing why this seems much more complicated that I think it is.... All that being said, we welcome your enhancements to WSDL2Java and its ant tasks. I would like to see some good documentation on the 'how' and 'why' of the changes you describe go in to our tree at the same time the changes go in. -- Tom Jordahl Macromedia Server Development -----Original Message----- From: Jim Stafford [mailto:jcstaff@apl.jhu.edu] Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 2004 1:49 PM To: Axis Developer Subject: Support needed for conditional stub/skeleton generation We would like to have the ability to use our externally created beans passed as data parameters within the WSDL->Java generated static stub/skeletons. We understand and have addressed all the issues involved with setting up serializers and deserializers, etc. However, there seems to be a deficiency in the implementation of the WSDL to Java generation. You cannot keep the WSDL to Java generation process from generating classes passed by the generated interfaces in the current CVS code base. There is a flag to turn off code generation for imported WSDL files, but that fails. There is the ability to identify a custom JavaGenerationFactory, but it cannot be passed any state information though the Ant task. I have finished implementing a local changes to the CVS version of org.apache.axis.wsdl.toJava and org.apache.axis.tools.ant.wsdl packages. Namely I have changed Wsdl2javaAntTask.java (added the ability to specify includes/excludes and general propeties as a factory sub-element), Emitter.java (added the ability to carry the more robust factory properties), extended JavaGenerationFactory (added the ability to assign the NoopGenerator for identified namespaces), and added some bean classes to carry the factory specification. Here's an example of our common Ant task: .. ... ... We are using this change locally and are happy with it. I need to write up some JUnit test cases before submitting it (I assume). I may also make a few more modifications (create Factory Methods in Wsdl2javaAntTask.java to make it easier to extend). However, I wanted to announce my need and intent to see what comments might be involved before submitting the bug/enhacement request and CVS Patch file. Any comments? any suggestions? thanks, jim