Details

    • Type: Bug Bug
    • Status: Closed Closed (View Workflow)
    • Priority: Major Major
    • Resolution: Done
    • Affects Version/s: None
    • Fix Version/s: 4.0
    • Component/s: Transformation Service
    • Security Level: Public (Everyone can see)
    • Labels:
      None
    • Similar Issues:
      Show 10 results 

      Description

      Why is there a package.html in org.jboss.soa.esb.services.transform?

        Activity

        Hide
        Tom Fennelly
        added a comment -

        Well, I'd have thought that if we were doing Javadoc we should be putting in the package.html into each package so at least a package description appears in the top level Javadoc page (the index). It can be zapped if you're not interested in that. Actually, if my memory serves me correctly - checkstyle/sub-coding-standards might even complain re the absense of this file.

        Show
        Tom Fennelly
        added a comment - Well, I'd have thought that if we were doing Javadoc we should be putting in the package.html into each package so at least a package description appears in the top level Javadoc page (the index). It can be zapped if you're not interested in that. Actually, if my memory serves me correctly - checkstyle/sub-coding-standards might even complain re the absense of this file.
        Hide
        Mark Little
        added a comment -

        We generate javadoc separately. We have no other examples of package.html in the source tree.

        Show
        Mark Little
        added a comment - We generate javadoc separately. We have no other examples of package.html in the source tree.
        Hide
        Tom Fennelly
        added a comment -

        "We generate javadoc separately" - what does that mean? We're not using the javadoc tool??

        Anyway, it's deleted from SVN so all packages are now without a package level title and description again

        Show
        Tom Fennelly
        added a comment - "We generate javadoc separately" - what does that mean? We're not using the javadoc tool?? Anyway, it's deleted from SVN so all packages are now without a package level title and description again
        Hide
        Mark Little
        added a comment -

        Yes, we use the javadoc tool (check the build.xml files).

        Show
        Mark Little
        added a comment - Yes, we use the javadoc tool (check the build.xml files).
        Hide
        Tom Fennelly
        added a comment -

        We're not using an important and powerful aspect of javadoc then i.e. package level details ;-( They're very easy to add and help users a lot.

        Show
        Tom Fennelly
        added a comment - We're not using an important and powerful aspect of javadoc then i.e. package level details ;-( They're very easy to add and help users a lot.
        Hide
        Mark Little
        added a comment -

        Although it may be useful, it's certainly not the norm to include them. Something to consider later, when we can do it consistently.

        Show
        Mark Little
        added a comment - Although it may be useful, it's certainly not the norm to include them. Something to consider later, when we can do it consistently.

          People

          • Assignee:
            Tom Fennelly
            Reporter:
            Mark Little
          • Votes:
            0 Vote for this issue
            Watchers:
            0 Start watching this issue

            Dates

            • Created:
              Updated:
              Resolved: