groovy-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jochen Theodorou <blackd...@gmx.org>
Subject Re: Package Groovydoc not helpful
Date Fri, 24 Jul 2015 12:56:13 GMT
Am 24.07.2015 14:23, schrieb Paul King:
[...]
> If you replace latest with next in the url, you'll see the same problem
> isn't there. We had briefly the header comment accidentally having /**
> at the beginning instead of /*.

but should that really matter? They are not in the right place to count 
as javadoc for the class. Is that a... what was it again? qdoc? A bug in 
qdoc?

>> Also, are we considering creating package-info.html /
>> package-info.java files?
>
> We have some package.html files but not many package-info.groovy (or
> Java) files.

but aren't the package-info.html files ignored too? I mean their content 
is supposed to how up on 
http://docs.groovy-lang.org/latest/html/gapi/groovy/lang/package-summary.html 
as well, or not? groovy/lang has a package-info.html file.

> At one point such files caused problems for Grails (was it
> Tomcat's classloader having issues with classnames containing hyphens?).
> I think we excluded/disabled some part of our package-info support. So
> it might be easy to re-enable but we'll need to test with Grails.

there was something, yes.... don't remember the details though atm.

bye blackdrag

-- 
Jochen "blackdrag" Theodorou
blog: http://blackdragsview.blogspot.com/


Mime
View raw message