lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Shai Erera <>
Subject Re: Facet examples javadoc missing in 4.0?
Date Sat, 24 Nov 2012 19:05:32 GMT
I don't hack anything, just return things to how they were. If we make the
separation successfully in time for 4.1, then we can change the build.xml
back. Otherwise, at least the examples javadocs will be out there.

Since it worked before, I don't think that there will be any issues with
maven, unless it didn't work correctly before.


On Sat, Nov 24, 2012 at 8:53 PM, Robert Muir <> wrote:

> On Sat, Nov 24, 2012 at 10:45 AM, Shai Erera <> wrote:
>> It's not that there were failures, but that you moved some tests under
>> demo/ that should belong under facet/. That's the dependency I'm talking
>> about. I tried to resolve it, but it wasn't trivial -- either these tests
>> will depend on demo/, or we rewrite them to use their own data, which will
>> take some time.
> Right, its wrong for these tests to be moved, and thats why i said "there
> is more work to do here".
> These tests should be rewritten to be "unit tests", with a clean
> separation of the tests that test the example.
> Currently its all messy and disorganized. I just didn't have the time to
> clean this up (it was around release time, I was annoyed at the situation,
> and took a half-hearted stab at fixing it just in case it was something I
> could fix in an hour).
>> It's not really a hack, it worked like that ever since 3.4, only recently
>> removed. If you want, let's mark 3998 as a blocker for 4.1, but for now,
>> this is what I'd like to fix:
> I don't really want to add hacks here, because who knows what else is
> broken/will break with packaging. For example, what will the maven
> -javadocs.jar look like? Is it correct? I have no idea.
> Thats why I say I think we should just do the work to fix this correctly.
> I don't like adding a special case situation with these examples that will
> only cause pain in the future.
> There is a lot of work to be done with these examples until we release
> javadocs for them. I don't see any package.htmls, some classes have no
> description, etc.

View raw message