Mailing-List: contact dev-help@ignite.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@ignite.apache.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: 
 <CA+0=VoV-nghKHbM69CTLNX0gUvkvwpURCspVu+2HwQ5NaqJuUQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: 
 <CAKoNANuaE_DAPbsRPXy+D6dXD4qd7ueoEeWFB1Yh1+PeJFaCaQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+0=VoV-nghKHbM69CTLNX0gUvkvwpURCspVu+2HwQ5NaqJuUQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Raul Kripalani <raulk@apache.org>
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2015 13:29:19 +0100
Message-ID: 
 <CAKoNANtZhESBgL4+0D=35H=knEfVbcz2aX41xxR1UPO5H0KR3w@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Coding Guidelines on Wiki
To: dev@ignite.apache.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e013d18b0b4e2e50520e1f7d6

--089e013d18b0b4e2e50520e1f7d6
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 1:22 PM, Dmitriy Setrakyan <dsetrakyan@apache.org>
wrote:

> Raul, do we really need to require the @author tag? I think it should be
> optional.
>

That's what the coding style said:

    "Every type should start with at least minimal Javadoc comments
including description and author information in the following form:"

All I did was fix the example in accordance with the rule. Now you see
where I'm coming from =E2=80=93 huh? ;-)

NOTE: I personally dislike this coding style, so this task of helping the
community improve the definitions of something I dislike is arduous for me.

I'm more akin to Google's Java style:
https://google.github.io/styleguide/javaguide.html. It's more commonplace,
neutral and less rigid.

Regards,

*Ra=C3=BAl Kripalani*
PMC & Committer @ Apache Ignite, Apache Camel | Integration, Big Data and
Messaging Engineer
http://about.me/raulkripalani | http://www.linkedin.com/in/raulkripalani
http://blog.raulkr.net | twitter: @raulvk

--089e013d18b0b4e2e50520e1f7d6--