db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rick Hillegas <Richard.Hille...@Sun.COM>
Subject JDBC4 documentation, was: [jira] Commented: (DERBY-1079) Build javadoc under jdk 1.6
Date Tue, 09 May 2006 14:48:56 GMT
Hi Andrew,

I don't think I understand your proposal. Do you want 10.2 to contain 
two bundles of documentation with a high level html page that switches 
between the two:

1) A bundle of user guides and javadoc for JDBC3 and

2) A separate bundle of user guides and javadoc for JDBC4?

Right now, when I unpack the 10.1.2.0 distribution, I see the following 
directories:

demo
docs
  html
  pdf
frameworks
javadoc
lib

Are you proposing to change this layout? Looking forward to more detail...

Thanks,
-Rick



Andrew McIntyre (JIRA) wrote:

>    [ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-1079?page=comments#action_12378564 ]

>
>Andrew McIntyre commented on DERBY-1079:
>----------------------------------------
>
>-    <antcall target="public-jdbc4-api"/>
>+    <antcall target="public-jdbc4-api" if="jdk16"/>
>
>Please don't break the top-level publishedapi target for JVMs < 1.6.
>
>Instead of a publishedapi_index.html how about we create a top-level index.html for the
bin distribution that also has pointers to the manuals? I can take care of the doc section
of the file if you like.
>
>  
>
>>Build javadoc  under jdk 1.6
>>----------------------------
>>
>>         Key: DERBY-1079
>>         URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-1079
>>     Project: Derby
>>        Type: Bug
>>    
>>
>
>  
>
>>  Components: Build tools
>>    Versions: 10.2.0.0
>>    Reporter: Rick Hillegas
>>    Assignee: Rick Hillegas
>>     Fix For: 10.2.0.0
>> Attachments: bug1079_clientPublicAPI.diff, bug1079_deprecated.diff, bug1079_embeddedPublicAPI.diff,
bug1079_rev1.diff, bug1079_split.diff
>>
>>We would like to build the javadoc under 1.6 so that all of the classes (including
the JDBC 3 and JDBC 4 support) end up in the same directory tree. This is particularly important
for the published API which we expose to end-users.
>>Right now you can do the following:
>>1) Build the whole codeline using the 1.4 compiler for most classes and the 1.6 compiler
for the JDBC4 support.
>>2) Build javadoc in a 1.4 environment (with JAVA_HOME set to 1.4). This runs step
(1) if it has not already happened. This javadoc excludes the JDBC4 support because generics-laden
JDBC4 signatures choke the 1.4 compiler.
>>3) Build the javadoc in a 1.6 environment (with JAVA_HOME set to 1.6). This will fail
if you have not run step (1); this is because you can't build Derby in a 1.6 environment yet.
This also generates a number of warnings because the 1.6 javadoc tool objects to code generated
by the JAVACC grammar tool; JAVACC turns out code with loop variables distastefully named
"enum". In addition, today, the 1.6 javadoc excludes the JDBC4 support.
>>We would like to end up with the following situation:
>>a) If your ant.properties points at a 1.6 installation, then the javadoc targets will
use the 1.6 javadoc tool and will include Derby's JDBC4 support. This will work regardless
of whether you have already built the class tree. If you have not already built the class
tree, then we will compile it under scenario (1) above.
>>b) If, however, your ant.properties does not point at a 1.6 installation, then the
javadocs target will continue to use the 1.4 javadoc tool to build only the classes built
today. The JDBC4 support will be excluded from this javadoc.
>>c) As part of releasing 10.2, we will build the javadoc under scenario (a).
>>d) Once 1.6 exits beta and becomes a production vm, the community can debate when
we want to fix DERBY-1078 and require 1.6 in the build environment.
>>    
>>
>
>  
>


Mime
View raw message