[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1670?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12714980#action_12714980
]
Shai Erera commented on LUCENE-1670:
------------------------------------
I have a couple of comments:
# In LogMergePolicy, you add a reference to mergeFactor ({...@link
#mergeFactor}), which is a private member of LMP. Wouldn't that be an issue
when generating the javadocs (i.e., create a link to a non-existent entity,
since private members are not generated in the javadocs)?
# In MergePolicy you added a link to SegmentInfo. Same as above - SegmentInfo
is package private and therefore I'm not sure its included in the javadocs. If
I look here (http://lucene.apache.org/java/2_4_0/api/core/index.html),
SegmentInfo does not appear there.
# In IndexWriter, you add references like this: {...@link
#addDocument(Document) addDocument} - is the 'addDocument' in the end
necessary. I've tried it and it doesn't come out nicely in the javadocs. Same
goes for {...@link #updateDocument(Term, Document) updateDocument}.
# In IndexWriter you replaced *see <a href="#mergePolicy">* with *see {...@link
#mergePolicy below}* - that's wrong for two reasons: (1) mergePolicy is private
(see comments above) and (2) the javadocs actually have an element afterwards:
*<a name="mergePolicy"></a>*. The part you replaced references that element,
rather than the mergePolicy member (which just happen to have the same name :)).
> Cosmetic JavaDoc updates
> ------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-1670
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1670
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: Javadocs
> Affects Versions: 2.4.2
> Environment: Lucene SVN (diff from r780545)
> Reporter: Tomer Gabel
> Priority: Trivial
> Fix For: 2.4.2
>
> Attachments: lucene_1670.patch
>
>
> I've taken the liberty of making a few cosmetic updates to various JavaDocs:
> * MergePolicy (minor cosmetic change)
> * LogMergePolicy (minor cosmetic change)
> * IndexWriter (major cleanup in class description, changed anchors to JavaDoc
> links [now works in Eclipse], no content change)
> Attached diff from SVN r780545.
> I would appreciate if whomever goes over this can let me know if my issue
> parameter choices were correct (yeah, blame my OCD), and if there's a more
> practical/convenient way to send these in, please let me know :-)
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
