geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Jencks <david_jen...@yahoo.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Release v1.1 of geronimo-schema-jee_5.
Date Thu, 19 Jul 2007 21:00:37 GMT

On Jul 19, 2007, at 9:18 AM, David Jencks wrote:

> This file is generated by xmlbeans compiliation, so the only way to  
> remove the questionable contents is with different source files.

Actually it looks like scomp has a -noann flag to ignore all  
annotations, but it doesn't appear to be exposed in the maven plugin.

>
> I don't completely understand the reasoning on why the current file  
> is unacceptable, as we are not in fact distributing the contents of  
> the schemas, just some text that applies to them.
>
> However if we want to remove this we could:
>
> 1. wait for craig russell to finish navigating the mine-infested  
> sun legal waters and get some more clearly licensed schemas available
> 2. use our typed up schemas to generate the xmlbeans classes (in  
> which case we should move all this stuff back to the public project
> 3. edit the secret copy of the xsds in the tck project to leave out  
> these notices before running the xmlbeans compiler.
>
> or
> 4. move to jaxb now.
>
> I think (2) might be the most reasonable if we have all the schemas  
> typed up.   Does anyone know of a binary comparison tool to see if  
> the generated classes from the 2 sets of schemas are reasonably  
> similar?
>
> I guess it might be worth asking Craig if there is light at the end  
> of the tunnel?

I'll work on (2), but it would be pretty helpful if someone could  
tell me where the typed in schemas actually are.  I found the servlet  
and jsp ones inside the servlet and jsp spec jars, but I haven't  
located any others such as the connector or ejb ones... and there are  
a pile more.

My current idea is to generate a jar with the same groupIdId and  
artifactId and put the code in the main build, not hidden in tck.  So  
far I have it in server/trunk/modules which is odd due to the groupId  
mismatch.   Should I make a schemas "top level subproject" next to  
server and specs?

thanks
david jencks

>
> thanks
> david jencks
>
> On Jul 19, 2007, at 8:40 AM, Kevan Miller wrote:
>
>>
>> On Jul 19, 2007, at 9:11 AM, Prasad Kashyap wrote:
>>
>>> Correction.
>>>
>>> The released j2ee-1.4 schema jars are here
>>> http://mirrors.ibiblio.org/pub/mirrors/maven2/org/apache/geronimo/ 
>>> schema/geronimo-schema-j2ee_1.4/1.1/
>>>
>>> The earlier link I posted are for our *deployed* 1.1-SNAPS of jee5
>>> schema... not *released*.
>>> http://people.apache.org/repo/m2-snapshot-repository/org/apache/ 
>>> geronimo/schema/geronimo-schema-jee_5/1.1-SNAPSHOT/
>>>
>>> Neverthless, they all have *.xsb files in them.
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>> Prasad
>>>
>>> On 7/19/07, Prasad Kashyap <goyathlay.geronimo@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> The 1.1-SNAPSHOT that we released earlier has the XSBs in them too.
>>>>
>>>> http://people.apache.org/repo/m2-snapshot-repository/org/apache/ 
>>>> geronimo/schema/geronimo-schema-jee_5/1.1-SNAPSHOT/
>>>>
>>>> so i guess this is ok too ?
>>
>> IMO, it's not OK and needs to be fixed. Can you take a look at  
>> this Prasad? If not, I'll have a look, when I can...
>>
>> --kevan
>>
>>
>


Mime
View raw message