I would think hosting javadocs only online would make most sense.
On 03/04/2014 5:39 AM, "Daniel Kulp" wrote:
>
> For 2.x, we basically generated 2 different sets of Javadoc for 2
> different purposes:
>
> 1) We generated the javadoc ONLY for the cxf-api. This is the javadoc
> that we stuck in t
I made a few changes to the javadoc stuff. If LDAP ever comes back, I’ll get
it committed.
Basically, for the distribution, I’ll leave the javadoc at just the “core”
javadoc. However, it also generates a jar of the full javadoc for everything.
This is what will be deployed to the website.
)
Regards,
Andrei.
> -Original Message-
> From: Christian Schneider [mailto:cschneider...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of
> Christian Schneider
> Sent: Donnerstag, 3. April 2014 07:48
> To: dev@cxf.apache.org
> Subject: Re: CXF javadoc questions for 3.0
>
> Why do we ne
Why do we need javadoc at all? If we create source jars for every maven
artifact and a source distribution we should already provide all
informations necessary.
At least when using an IDE the user will automatically see the javadoc
generated from the source.
So the only difference is for users
Hi Dan,
I think creating the distibution for javadocs is a very right thing. What do
you think about going further
and providing it as yet another CXF downloadable (like sources for example)? So
the main distribution will
stay small but people may download the javadocs as well if they will. My
