I have removed all the non-current Artemis javadocs leaving only the 'latest' ones (currently for 2.26.0), just as there are only 'latest' ones for 5.x.
Since this change speeds up the full site serve.sh / build.sh processes a fair bit, I decided to use that offset and also modify the serve_subset.sh version to exclude all the javadoc entirely to speed it up further too. This gets the subset rebuilds down to about 1 second which will make it a lot nicer to work on general site changes. On Wed, 5 Oct 2022 at 18:45, Robbie Gemmell <robbie.gemm...@gmail.com> wrote: > > JB, are your thoughts on this more general, i.e also applying to the > 5.x 'latest' (typically stale) javadocs on the website as well, rather > than just the per-release Artemis javadocs this thread started about? > > If so it would seem to me that all the people who regularly update the > website bits for releases etc dont think we should bother having them > there anymore. > > On Thu, 29 Sept 2022 at 20:10, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <j...@nanthrax.net> wrote: > > > > Hi Clebert, > > > > I'm +1 about this for the two reasons: > > > > 1. I don't think lot of people read the Javadoc on website (personally > > I'm reading directly in the IDE) > > 2. We can still have the javadoc jar published on Maven (not need to > > update website) > > > > Regards > > JB > > > > On Wed, Sep 28, 2022 at 6:12 PM Clebert Suconic > > <clebert.suco...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > Can we stop publishing javadocs on the ActiveMQ Website for artemis? > > > > > > I see no point on publishing it as they are available in Maven. > > > > > > My vote is to completely remove it. > > > > > > > > > So, if you agree with me, please respond with > > > > > > +1 Yes, stop publishing javadocs for ActiveMQ Artemis on the website > > > and keep them on maven as usual. > > > > > > > > > > > > if you have any other preferences please state a -1 and a reason for.. > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Clebert Suconic
