[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-6257?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14328199#comment-14328199
]
Alexandre Rafalovitch commented on LUCENE-6257:
-----------------------------------------------
Javadocs are useful for navigating the classes and documentation around and for
being discoverable on the web. For example, I used Javadocs to see what
UpdateRequestProcessors were available before I built my own resource (which
leverages Javadoc information). The source code has a bit too much information
to be able to navigate it easily.
Similarly, when people search for a particular component on the web, Javadoc is
often what they get for the more obscure ones. Often, a very old Javadoc due to
the frame-based HTML (another project I attacked), but it is still better than
nothing. And the source code is not exposed quite the same way, as the
versioning in a repository is more continuous and it is much harder to compare
what's in 4.7 with what's in 4.9 as an example.
Many of *Solr* users are not Java developers and Javadoc is a half-way point
they can dip their toes in to learn things.
This obviously refers only to the components that users may use by name in the
various configuration locations. The use case for Javadoc of the inner/deep
implementation classes is a lot less clear to me.
> 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]
