[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-6257?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14328233#comment-14328233
]
Hoss Man commented on LUCENE-6257:
----------------------------------
bq. Who is reimplementing lucene or solr apis in a clean room!?
who said anything about re-implimenting?
I'm talking about people who want to *use* the APIs (ie: instaniate
IndexWriter, call methods on it, etc...) but are not permisted by their legal
department to download source code for open source librariries.
bq. Who are these mystical users that have this need?
Some IBM employees i talked to a few years ago, and some Amazon employees i
talk to a few months ago.
> 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: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
