geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jason Dillon <jason.dil...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Java doc is Geronimo 2.0.1 API
Date Wed, 22 Oct 2008 11:58:11 GMT
I don't think it implies that really... just only shows what javadocs  
we do have, though we should probably keep one copy (latest) for each  
major release.

--jason


On Oct 22, 2008, at 6:51 PM, Joe Bohn wrote:

> Yes, I was thinking the same thing.  I just hadn't gotten to it yet  
> and I was also a little hesitant because that implies that we will  
> have the javadoc for all releases.  At the moment we only have 2.0.1  
> and 2.1.3.
>
> Joe
>
>
> Jason Dillon wrote:
>> I suggest we create an intermediate page in the wiki to list the  
>> javadoc versions, and link to that from the sidenav instead of  
>> going directly to 2.1.3.
>> --jason
>> On Oct 21, 2008, at 10:18 PM, Joe Bohn wrote:
>>> I built and checked in the server 2.1.3 javadocs.  This seemed to  
>>> be the most expedient thing to do but there are some concerns:
>>>
>>> #1 This is a huge amount of content to include in svn.  I think  
>>> infra will not be happy with us.
>>> #2 Given #1, I debated deleting the 2.0.1 javadoc.  However, this  
>>> won't save anything given that svn must keep the history.  It will  
>>> save anyone from getting all of the 2.0.1 content if they check  
>>> out the site trunk.  What do you think, should we delete or keep  
>>> 2.0.1 javadoc?
>>> #3 Also given #1, it's probably a good thing that we haven't done  
>>> this for each release.  Perhaps we should just do this once for  
>>> each major version?  Thoughts?
>>> #4 We had discussed using the maven generated site rather than  
>>> distributing this javadoc.  However that also presents some  
>>> problems:
>>> - Currently it doesn't build for tags/2.1.3 (at least not for me).
>>> - When it does build, the javadoc is per module/project.  So  
>>> rather than a complete view of javadoc as with that just checked  
>>> in you must first navigate to the module of interest and then you  
>>> can view the javadoc for that module. This doesn't seem as useful  
>>> to me.
>>>
>>> I'm not sure if I want to take the time to investigate the mvn  
>>> site issues right now .... anybody else interested?
>>>
>>> Joe
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Ted Kirby wrote:
>>>>> From the home page, if I choose Javadoc as the first choice  
>>>>> under the
>>>> Development section of the left nav bar, I get 2.0.1 Javadoc.  This
>>>> should be updated to 2.1.3.
>>>> Ted Kirby
>>>
>


Mime
View raw message