river-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Greg Trasuk <tras...@stratuscom.com>
Subject Re: How to start from here?
Date Tue, 09 Jan 2007 15:03:07 GMT
See small comment interspersed.



On Tue, 2007-01-09 at 04:32, Dan Creswell wrote:

> > (Mark Brouwer)
> > But specs that are required for a reimplementation or that tell you what
> > to expect in the not that less straightforward cases (which my mind
> > always tend to look for) should IMO be where they belong and that is
> > close as possible to the code that I have to my avail in my IDE.
> >
> Hmmm, knowing you as I do, I'm not surprised - me, I prefer the specs
> separate and I cross ref into JavaDoc when I need to.
> Ugh, it's a little too subjective for me.

I'd be happier with separate specifications, however that suggestion has
gone over like an iron balloon (translation for non-English speakers: it
was suggested and debated at length, and wasn't taken up by the
community).  So in cases where the API and the specification are
inseparable (like Mark suggests below), I agree with Mark that we may as
well have the spec inside the package documentation.  That way it is
subject to version control and the normal suggest/discuss/vote/commit

One qualifier on the suggestion; I'd only want specs rolled in with
generic API's.  For instance the JavaSpaces spec would be fine in the
net.jini.space package, but not with the Outrigger implementation.

> > I see no problem in moving most of the Lease Specification
> > http://java.sun.com/products/jini/2.1/doc/specs/html/lease-spec.html to
> > the package documentation of net.jini.core.lease as long as people get
> > linked there from an overview about leasing to that package.
> > 
> > 
> Dan.

View raw message