We could certainly use this format for changelog crap, and since noone uses it for anything we don't need an xdoclet task to process it. I definitely agree it looks better than the incorrect html.
david jencks On 2002.04.03 21:42:30 -0500 Jason Dillon wrote: > > > > > >I don't understand what you want to have generated, nor why. Could you > be > >more specific? xdoclet can't modify the contents of a java file, it can > >only generate new files. > > > > I know it can't modify the file... basically I think that it would be > easier and more consistent to code these changelog-like things as: > > @change 20010830 marc fleury > @change-info Initial import > > >Personally I think these "I messed with it in this way" historical > comments > >are a _really_ bad idea, and duplicate badly something cvs does well. I > >prefer the comments to explain clearly only the current functionality of > >the class. > > > > I agree completely. Unfortunatly some people (well ok one person) > thinks differently. Perhaps we can convince them otherwise. > > I would much rather these go away, but if the don't go away, a > consistent manner for writting them seem appropriate. I have already > had to correct many of the imporper html usage... so I was thinking if > we didn't use html to give it structure it would be easier to keep > consistent. > > --jason > > > > _______________________________________________ > Jboss-development mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development > > _______________________________________________ Jboss-development mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
