I am wondering about what kind of documentation you are thinking about. We have so much documentation that I hardly know where to stop.
I think "blind" javadoc is just so much baloney. If there are any specific use cases that require documentation I'm happy to discuss that. Kristian ti., 27.09.2011 kl. 09.24 -0400, skrev Mark H. Wood: > On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 07:49:37AM -0400, Jesse Glick wrote: > > On 11/19/2010 02:19 PM, Kristian Rosenvold wrote: > > > if it hurts you, make a patch; documentation upgrade, javadoc or code > > > changes > > > > The difficulty with submitting Javadoc changes is that if you need > > the Javadoc you probably are not going to be sure what it should > > say. :-) > > I am always amused (and saddened) to read that the documentation > should be written by those who do not understand the code. > > It is possible to do this tolerably well. It's exhausting, but it > *is* an effective way to get to know the product better -- > eventually. And there are still gaps: places where it's simply not > feasible to divine what the author was thinking when he wrote *that*. > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
