[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-6257?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14328174#comment-14328174
]
Steve Rowe commented on LUCENE-6257:
------------------------------------
bq. My understanding the main reason for these jars is e.g. IDE integration
for tooltips, etc, and like I noted before, it seemed to me only the source jar
was necessary for both showing code as well as the javadocs.
Some support for the idea that the javadoc jar is unnecessary for IDEs:
https://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/issues/detail?id=5429#c12
https://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg02391.html
I don't know of any other uses for the javadoc jar than in IDEs. I tried to
google mention of any other uses, but I couldn't find any.
> Remove javadocs from releases (except for publishing)
> -----------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-6257
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-6257
> Project: Lucene - Core
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Reporter: Ryan Ernst
>
> In LUCENE-6247, one idea discussed to decrease the size of release artifacts
> was to remove javadocs from the binary release. Anyone needing javadocs
> offline can download the source distribution and generate the javadocs.
> I also think we should investigate removing javadocs jars from maven. I did
> a quick test, and getting the source in intellij seemed sufficient to show
> javadocs. However, this test was far from scientific, so if someone knows
> for sure whether a separate javadocs jar is truly necessary, please say so.
> Regardless of the outcome of the two ideas above, we would continue building,
> validating and making the javadocs available online.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
