This Bugzilla instance is a read-only archive of historic NetBeans bug reports. To report a bug in NetBeans please follow the project's instructions for reporting issues.
Summary: | beans.xml not created in Maven projects | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | javaee | Reporter: | Petr Jiricka <pjiricka> |
Component: | Maven | Assignee: | Martin Janicek <mjanicek> |
Status: | RESOLVED DUPLICATE | ||
Severity: | normal | CC: | dkonecny, johnament, kganfield, viggonavarsete |
Priority: | P3 | ||
Version: | 6.x | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | All | ||
Issue Type: | DEFECT | Exception Reporter: |
Description
Petr Jiricka
2010-02-16 05:33:31 UTC
*** Bug 181334 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** On the other hand, in Maven projects we do not normally allow customization of the project being created - it just follows the standard archetypes. One question is whether to include beans.xml in the archetype by default, so it is always present. But that may not be a good idea because of the following GlassFish bug: https://glassfish.dev.java.net/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=11668 I think it shouldn't be created as default, but as an option when generating the project. I would look at all options in the wizard as changing the default (archetype), but I think this is ok. *** Bug 195688 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** So what do you guys suggest? The way I understand it is that this issue cannot be resolve until there is an archetype which generates beans.xml (always or conditionally). I think there are two options: 1. Conditional include/exclude of files during archetype generation 2. Have two archetypes, one with and one without beans.xml In order to pick option 1 the following issues must be resolved (as far as I understand): http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/ARCHETYPE-58 http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/ARCHETYPE-274 Which means, in the short term it looks like option 2 is the only way to achieve this. This is still valid issue, but there is probably no time to do so in 7.1. Setting TM --> Next. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 220707 *** |