I volunteer to mavenize jaxme and my first impression is that I agree
that it'd be better to go with maven1 first. From the maven web site,
moving to maven2 shouldn't be too difficult. I haven't used maven2 at
all though.
However, as suggested in
http://maven.apache.org/reference/conventions.
On 7/27/05, Nacho G. Mac Dowell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> My opinion would be that jaxme sources would be the top level project
> and api, js, xs and pm 4 subprojects. Something like:
Hmm, I'm not sure. Doesn't the rule "one project, one artifact" apply?
In other words,
don't we need another p
Jochen Wiedmann wrote:
Hmm, I'm not sure. Doesn't the rule "one project, one artifact" apply?
If you prefer we could have the top level project without any sources
and 5 subprojects. It would probably be an easier and cleaner layout
anyway. I'm just used to have a main project with subproje
On Wed, 2005-07-27 at 11:19 +0200, Nacho G. Mac Dowell wrote:
> Any thoughts? Should we move to svn before? Should there be a new maven
> folder on cvs for this?
subversion is much better for copying material around than cvs. not only
does svn support cheap copies and supports copies as a natu
On Wed, 2005-07-27 at 12:15 +0200, Jochen Wiedmann wrote:
> On 7/27/05, Nacho G. Mac Dowell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > My opinion would be that jaxme sources would be the top level project
> > and api, js, xs and pm 4 subprojects. Something like:
>
> Hmm, I'm not sure. Doesn't the rule "one
Hi, it's me again :)
I noticed that when parsing a class with fields these fields are stored as
JavaQNames, but the Classname e.g. "java.lang.String" is not split into
package (java.lang) and class (String), but kept as a whole as classname.
This behavior can be changed when using
JavaQNameImp
Hello
I stumbled upon this piece of code in JavaSource:
public void newBeanProperty(JavaQName pType, String pName) {
String upperCaseName = Character.toUpperCase(pName.charAt(0)) +
pName.substring(1);
if (JavaQNameImpl.VOID.equals(pType)) {
newBeanProperty(pTy
jochen 2005/07/27 12:43:32
Modified:src/jaxme/org/apache/ws/jaxme/generator/sg/impl/ccsg Tag:
v0_4 GroupHandlerSG.java SequenceHandlerSG.java
Log:
A sequence was always treated as a required group,
even if all particles were optional.
Revision Changes
jochen 2005/07/27 12:45:58
Modified:.Tag: v0_4 status.xml
src/js/org/apache/ws/jaxme/js Tag: v0_4 JavaSource.java
Log:
The method JavaSource.newBeanProperty() was mismatching
void and boolean when checking for "isFoo" vs. "getFoo".
Submitted by: Frederic A
jochen 2005/07/27 12:46:12
Modified:src/js/org/apache/ws/jaxme/js Tag: JAXME-28 JavaSource.java
.Tag: JAXME-28 status.xml
Log:
The method JavaSource.newBeanProperty() was mismatching
void and boolean when checking for "isFoo" vs. "getFoo".
Submitted by: Fr
jochen 2005/07/27 12:46:25
Modified:.status.xml
src/js/org/apache/ws/jaxme/js JavaSource.java
Log:
The method JavaSource.newBeanProperty() was mismatching
void and boolean when checking for "isFoo" vs. "getFoo".
Submitted by: Frederic Ahring, fahring at de
Frederic Ahring wrote:
I can only assume boolean is meant here ?
You are, of course, right. :-)
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Frederic Ahring wrote:
I checked JavaSource.newJavaField and found it in three places. Below is a
diff.
It seems, you are using the 0.4 branch. Applies you find a suggested
patch for the HEAD (aka 0.5) branch. (Note, that 0.5 beta is already out
and 0.5final will most likely be published in
13 matches
Mail list logo
