Yes, that would be clear enough. Sébastien 2011/9/21 sebb <seb...@gmail.com>: > Why not just add some text to the tag to explain what has happened? > > Something like: > > @since 2.0 (changed to concrete class in 3.0) > > 2011/9/21 Sébastien Brisard <sebastien.bris...@m4x.org>: >> Maybe that tag should be removed (drastic... but no possible confusion!). >> Sébastien >> >> 2011/9/21 Gilles Sadowski <gil...@harfang.homelinux.org>: >>> On Wed, Sep 21, 2011 at 06:25:13AM +0200, Sébastien Brisard wrote: >>>> Hi, >>>> I'm currently working on MATH-662. So far, I have merged >>>> CholeskyDecomposition and CholeskyDecompositionImpl. My question is >>>> very simple: CholeskyDecomposition exists as an interface since >>>> version 2.0 (as indicated in the current Javadoc), but as a concrete >>>> class since version 3.0 only. Should the @since tag be updated >>>> accordingly? >>> >>> In fact, it depends on whether this tag is intended for tracking the >>> functionality or the implementation. >>> And either action could be misleading... >>> >>> >>> Regards, >>> Gilles >>> >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org >>> >>> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org >> >> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > >
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
