james-server-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Andrew C. Oliver" <acoli...@apache.org>
Subject Re: about javadocs (was: Re: FW: What do we need to release 2.1?)
Date Mon, 19 Aug 2002 01:34:43 GMT
I totally disagree with just about everything Noel said except for the 
end.  Development builds "milestone builds" or whatever, should not be 
delayed for quality concerns.  It just can't be blessed as a release.

As long as everyone understands that documentation is as important as 
code and that poorly documented code is just pure rat dung.  IF you 
don't Javadoc, you are a crappy no good developer.  Code complete, means 
docs too.

Noel, you're wrong, once releases are the "gold standard" developers 
care.  What good is a release to a user if he can't make hide nor hair 
of it?  If I weren't a semi-decent Java developer I couldn't even set up 
JAMES.  That puts JAMES a bit behind most other mail servers.  If a 
developer doesn't care about that, then there isn't much he could care 
about.  I've seen projects where the documentation was tied to the 
*real* release and the developers DID care.


Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> Peter,
> I agree with almost all of your points.  The only ones that I disagree with
> are:
>>observation of the changelog indicates, leaving javadoc out vs.
>>adding javadoc has not made the development any faster.
> I disagree, in a way that you'll like.  I think that accurate javadocs
> facilitates development.
>>I also suggested that the internal documentation be tied to a release
> because:
>>i) That way it actually gets done
> Only because you want to get it done.  Practically, it just doesn't work
> that way.  Developers already have access to the current code, so if they
> don't care about the javadocs, holding a release up isn't an incentive for
> them to do it.  And you don't need the incentive, you are doing it anyway.
>>ii) When the release announcement spurs a few developers to take a look
>>at the code base, they'll find a well-documented, inviting code base.
> I support that goal.
> As I said in another e-mail, let's put out a 2.1a2 Milestone Build to
> replace the ancient May 30 2.1a1 Milestone, and I'll feel much better for
> our end users.
> 	--- Noel

To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:james-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:james-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org>

View raw message