> I don't think it upside down. Plugins should not share packages with > core code, since that would permit them to use package-private APIs. > Also, re-arranging the code to make the javadoc nice is right, since the > javadoc is a primary means of describing the code.
Yes, but what I mean is that it is "stange" that it is a documentation issue that raise this need for refactoring. Moreover, I would like to suggest some other javadoc "improvements" (?): 1. Create a group for abstract plugins (like lib-http or lib-regex-filter) named for instance "Plugins API" 2. Create a group for extensions points (As far as I remember, one of the first problem when you want to extend nutch is to found where are the hooks, ie what are the extensions points). One more time, since the javadoc groups are filtered by packages, each extension point interface must be moved to specific package. The idea is then to move all the core extensions points to a new package (for instance org.apache.nutch.api). 3. Create many javadoc plugins groups (one for each major kind of plugin : Indexing, Parsing, Protocol, Query, UrlFilter and Misc for those that cannot be categorized). Thanks for your suggestions and comments. Jérôme -- http://motrech.free.fr/ http://www.frutch.org/
