uima-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Himanshu Gahlot <himanshu.gahlo...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Javadocs for 2.4.0 seem inconsistent
Date Fri, 12 Oct 2012 22:59:09 GMT
Thanks Marshall! This was the only inconsistency I noticed.

Himanshu


On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 3:55 PM, Marshall Schor <msa@schor.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> The Javadocs we distribute are a subset of the classes, as you have
> discovered.
> There is an attempt to not distribute Javadocs for classes which are
> "internal",
> or "implementations", as opposed to APIs, as these are more likely to
> change
> from release to release.
>
> At one point someone started some work to have a more complete Javadoc
> generated,
> for "developers" to use, but that wasn't completed.
>
> Is this the only lack of conformity that you see, or are there other kinds
> of
> issues?
>
> Thanks. -Marshall Schor
>
> On 10/12/2012 2:35 PM, Himanshu Gahlot wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I was exploring the classes in the newly released 2.4.0 version of UIMA
> > through the online Javadocs (
> > http://uima.apache.org/d/uimaj-2.4.0/apidocs/index.html) but found that
> > they do not conform to the actual classes in the API. I checked this by
> > downloading both source and binary files for 2.4.0 release from here (
> > http://uima.apache.org/downloads.cgi#Latest%20Official%20Releases) and
> > compared the actual class hierarchy in those with the online Javadocs.
> The
> > Javadocs packaged in the download are also not conforming to the actual
> API
> > structure. For instance, the package org.apache.uima.cas.impl shows only
> 5
> > classes in the javadocs (
> > http://uima.apache.org/d/uimaj-2.4.0/apidocs/index.html) but in the
> actual
> > jar/source it has more than 50 classes. Is this issue known already or
> am I
> > missing something on my end?
> >
> > Himanshu
> >
>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message