Leif Mortenson wrote:
> Peter Donald wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 25 Jan 2002 15:38, Leif Mortenson wrote:
>>
>>> Currently, the classes in the scratchpad are not being included in the
>>> building of javadocs. Should they be? I found it quite useful to modify
>>> my local build to include them with the rest of the classes, however
>>> that may be confusing to most users.
>>>
>>
>> How about adding them into the main javadocs target but grouping them
>> in their own category if possible. Something like
>>
>> <group title="Scratchpad Packages">
>> <package name="org.apache.excalibur.foo"/>
>> <package name="org.apache.excalibur.bar"/>
>> </group>
>> etc?
>>
>> That would give people ample warning that they are experimental but
>> would still allow one set of javadocs to be generated.
>
>
>
>
> Good idea, but the problem is that there are several packages which
> contain both scratchpad and excalibur classes. (How do you refer to the
> non-excalibur classes).
>
> That would also be tough to maintain as all new packages would have to
> be added to build.xml when the were created.
>
> How about I create a second javadocs directory called
> build/scratchpad-javadocs until we come up with a better solution. It
> would be nice to have the links between the scratchpad and excalibur
> javadocs. But I think that it would be more confusing to have them
> together.
I went ahead and implemented this and checked it in. It is easy to
change :-)
Noticed one problem though. The packages which have files both in
Scratchpad and the main Excalibur source trees include some of the main
Excalibur classes in the scratchpad javadocs. They don't include any
text, so they must be being built from the class files.
Could be a little confusing, but at least there are javadocs on the
scratchpad now.
Let me know if you have any ideas though.
Cheers,
Leif
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
