javaType : generate classes in subpackage of the target package

[ogerardin]

Suppose I generate my classes in target package com.example.

If I specify a javaType property of Foo, it will be generated as com.example.Foo, as expected.
However if I specify a javaType property of bar.Foo (with a dot), it will be generated as bar.Foo (i.e. in package bar).

To me it would make more sense to generate it in package com.example.bar.Foo, i.e. a subpackage of the target package. As it is now, if I want to generate classes in subpackages of the target package, I have to repeat the fully qualified package name in every javaType property. And of course if I want to change it I will have to change in all the places it is referenced...

If we want to preserve this behavior for compatibility and still allow generating classes in subpackages, I suggest we introduce the convention that if the javaType begins with a dot, it's considered relative to the target package.

For example:

• javaType=bar.Foo -> generates class bar.Foo (same as current behavior)
• javaType=.bar.Foo -> generates class com.example.bar.Foo

What do you think?

[ogerardin]

I realize this has already been suggested here: #195 (comment)
but I can't figure out the status of this request. I'm using the Maven plugin v1.0.2 and it totally ignores if my javaType begins with a dot (it just strips it).

[ogerardin]

#195 (comment) has been marked as closed by #1054, which was merged into master on Dec 12, 2019, while release 1.0.2 is from Jan 27, 2020.

Yet I get the same behavior whether I specify javaType=bar.Foo or javaType=.bar.Foo

What am I missing?

[ogerardin]

(sorry for the monologue...)
So apparently the commit only handles the case where the javaType is not a qualified name (i.e. does not contain a dot) but it does not handle the case where it begins with a dot.
So my issue still stands :)

[dewthefifth]

What prevents you from declaring your javaType to be com.example.bar.Foo?

I guess this is just an enhancement request?

[ogerardin]

What prevents you from declaring your javaType to be com.example.bar.Foo?

Nothing, and that would work, but I shouldn't have to use com.example in the schema because it's a generation-time parameter. I want to be able to put the generated classes in subpackages of the target package, without knowing what it will be.

[joelittlejohn]

Thanks @ogerardin. I have reopened #195.