uima-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Richard Eckart de Castilho <richard.eck...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: javadoc generating conventions
Date Thu, 05 Sep 2013 10:50:22 GMT
So I suppose this means that we should create JavaDoc artifacts in the
future:

2x +1 (Richard, Peter)
1x +0 (Marschall)

No other votes ;)

-- Richard

On 30.08.2013, at 10:46, Peter Kl├╝gl <pkluegl@uni-wuerzburg.de> wrote:

> On 29.08.2013 23:40, Marshall Schor wrote:
>> We have our multi-module builds set up so that
>> 
>> a) Javadocs are run just for the publicly-viewable apis
>> b) not run for individual sub-modules (e.g., not for uimaj-core).
>> 
>> Many releases ago, we did not even publish modules (other than maven plugins) to
>> maven-central - we just did binary convenience builds, and source releases,
>> published to the Apache Mirroring system.
>> 
>> Gradually, (as of uimaj release 2.3.1) we conformed more to the Maven normal
>> conventions, and we started making our individual projects available on maven
>> central, although without javadocs.
>> 
>> We could "turn on" javadoc creation for individual modules (probably only under
>> the -Papache-release profile, to make development builds go faster).  I think
>> these would (by default - need to investigate) be "full" javadocs.
>> 
>> Richard suggests we do this, I'm +0 on this (not convinced that the Javadocs are
>> of actual interest to anyone, and they take up space -- but I guess that's
>> old-fashioned thinking :-)).
>> 
>> Other opinions?
> 
> +1
> 
> (not that ruta has javadocs yet)
> 
> Peter
> 
>> 
>> -Marshall

Mime
View raw message