lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Robert Muir (Commented) (JIRA)" <>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-3887) 'ant javadocs' should fail if a package is missing a package.html
Date Wed, 21 Mar 2012 03:34:48 GMT


Robert Muir commented on LUCENE-3887:

Perhaps running these checks could be an optional target for developers that they can do with
their self-supplied Checkstyle jar? For example, it someone runs ant checkstyle, we'll tell
them that Checkstyle isn't included for license reasons and quickly explain the few steps
necessary to get checking going.

Thats a good idea, maybe you just have to put the jar in your ~/.ant/lib otherwise the target
does not work (kinda sorta similar to clover stuff we have).
> 'ant javadocs' should fail if a package is missing a package.html
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>                 Key: LUCENE-3887
>                 URL:
>             Project: Lucene - Java
>          Issue Type: Task
>          Components: general/build
>            Reporter: Robert Muir
> While reviewing the javadocs I noticed many packages are missing a basic package.html.
> For 3.x I committed some package.html files where they were missing (I will port forward
to trunk).
> I think all packages should have this... really all public/protected classes/methods/constants,
> but this would be a good step.

This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators:!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see:


To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message