I don't like how this is currently a manual process, sure if you had
used {@code here we would have detected it, but in general I think we
should be validating this javadocs html?e.g. if i put this page http://lucene.apache.org/solr/4_0_0/solr-core/org/apache/solr/handler/PingRequestHandler.html into the w3 validator (http://validator.w3.org/) it complains: Line 191, Column 8: end tag for "CODE" omitted, but its declaration does not permit this Anyone know of a good way we can improve our checker for this? Then we would be able to keep it correct. On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 12:52 PM, <rm...@apache.org> wrote: > Author: rmuir > Date: Wed Oct 24 16:52:18 2012 > New Revision: 1401778 > > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1401778&view=rev > Log: > fix unclosed tag that makes the whole javadocs page have a huge font > > Modified: > > lucene/dev/trunk/solr/core/src/java/org/apache/solr/handler/PingRequestHandler.java > > Modified: > lucene/dev/trunk/solr/core/src/java/org/apache/solr/handler/PingRequestHandler.java > URL: > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/lucene/dev/trunk/solr/core/src/java/org/apache/solr/handler/PingRequestHandler.java?rev=1401778&r1=1401777&r2=1401778&view=diff > ============================================================================== > --- > lucene/dev/trunk/solr/core/src/java/org/apache/solr/handler/PingRequestHandler.java > (original) > +++ > lucene/dev/trunk/solr/core/src/java/org/apache/solr/handler/PingRequestHandler.java > Wed Oct 24 16:52:18 2012 > @@ -119,7 +119,7 @@ import org.slf4j.LoggerFactory; > * </li> > * <li><code>http://.../ping?action=status</code> > * - returns a status code indicating if the healthcheck file exists > - * ("<code>enabled</code>") or not ("<code>disabled<code>") > + * ("<code>enabled</code>") or not ("<code>disabled</code>") > * </li> > * </ul> > * > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
