How about this - Kevin did it because (1) it improves Cayenne and (2)
he felt like doing it. Every day we hear "I am using X, so X has to be
the most popular technology out there, so you must make it your
highest priority to integrate with X"... Fine, except that "X" is
different for every person, and at the end we have the entire alphabet
to take care of.
Technically both Maven and Ant plugins are trivial, as there is a
class in Cayenne core called DbLoader. However doing a production
quality work means writing the code, unit tests and documentation.
This means someone spending more than a few minutes on that.
Everything can't happen overnight. Second guessing the developer
priority is not going to help here.
Andrus
On Apr 11, 2009, at 12:45 PM, Adrian A. wrote:
Well, please understand that I'm writing this not because I need it
but
because others have requested it and I can see value in having it.
At the
moment, all my projects are in maven, so it made it a lot easier to
test
that way. Frankly, I'd just assume write in jRuby and use buildr.
The
process would be a lot simpler for me.
Please feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but:
- shouldn't exactly the same functionality be in Cayenne Modeler,
the Maven
and the ANT task regarding the reverse engineering process? I.e.
from the
same user input parameters to produce exactly the same output - aka
a nice
and correctly generated datamap?
- Cayenne Modeler already does this reverse engineering, so the
functionality is practically already there?
- the Maven and the ANT task would be than just a wrapper to call that
functionality?
- this would be than similar to the case of Cayenne ClassGeneration?
If so, than wouldn't be the first step to refactor the actual Cayenne
Modeler functionality(the already working) that already does reverse
engineering to some common classes in:
org.apache.cayenne.gen.*
like it was done for ClassGeneration?
to be simply callable from the Maven and ANT task, thus making them
trivial
to implement?
Thank you,
A.
