Is it possible to include blog links or samples as:
"External References:"
?
I think that someone that wants to help with the documentation can have a
very good starting point with the external references on hand, and it is
very clear that is not the "Official documentation"
On Mon, Feb 29, 2016
On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 06:40PM, Cédric Champeau wrote:
> 2016-02-29 18:37 GMT+01:00 Konstantin Boudnik :
>
> > Sorry for a delay in the answer...
> >
> > On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 12:01PM, Jochen Theodorou wrote:
> > >
> > > On 27.02.2016 05:26, Aseem Bansal wrote:
> > > >Hi Konstantin Boudnik
> >
2016-02-29 18:37 GMT+01:00 Konstantin Boudnik :
> Sorry for a delay in the answer...
>
> On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 12:01PM, Jochen Theodorou wrote:
> >
> > On 27.02.2016 05:26, Aseem Bansal wrote:
> > >Hi Konstantin Boudnik
> > >
> > >Are the things on groovy-lang not considered originating from Apa
Sorry for a delay in the answer...
On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 12:01PM, Jochen Theodorou wrote:
>
> On 27.02.2016 05:26, Aseem Bansal wrote:
> >Hi Konstantin Boudnik
> >
> >Are the things on groovy-lang not considered originating from Apache
> >premises?
Where the code for groovy-lang is hosted? Tha
On 27.02.2016 05:26, Aseem Bansal wrote:
Hi Konstantin Boudnik
Are the things on groovy-lang not considered originating from Apache
premises?
If we link to Mr Hakis blog, and that is seen as Docs, then we have
external Docs, which do not originate from the ASF. In my opinion no
problem, si
>
> I agree with Cédric.
> It'd be better to integrate the actual tips in the JavaDocs per se.
> Furthermore, the Groovy's GroovyDoc can also contain code samples that are
> actually tested, with assertions.
> So not only would that improve the documentation itself, without going
> through another
was thinking of the same problem with our http://gpars.website. Do we
include code samples or not ? or only links to external sites ? i like the
idea of "live" code fragments within the doc.s that are compiled/tested as
a part of document generation. this guarantees that code in our docs works
as
I think it is better to have very complete documentation at GroovyDoc level,
without the need to follow external links. My experience with the Ratpack
Javadoc documentation is that with all example code and snippets included at
Javadoc level that it is very easy to use as reference.
It is no prob
Hi Konstantin Boudnik
Are the things on groovy-lang not considered originating from Apache
premises? The repository for the same is licensed to Apache and is in
Apache's git repository. Am I missing something here?
On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 9:20 PM, Konstantin Boudnik wrote:
> There's another con
I side with Cédric here. The Java/Groovy docs should only link to other parts
of the official documentation, or at least to endpoints the Groovy team
controls. I don’t have to go online to read the docs or root around in my
~/.m2 repo to find them, they are displayed automagically by my IDE an
Well it's not really hidden, as the groovy/javadoc is published on the
web and quite high in the google search results (at least for me).
Also you can configure e.g. Eclipse to automatically download sources
and javadocs for all dependencies, so it's directly visible in the IDE.
Cheers,
Pasca
There's another concern: docs of an Apache project has to originate, as the
source code, from Apache premises (Infra, etc.) While linking doesn't exactly
violates this, it is still looks like "Ok, here's our documentation, but for
this little piece you'd need to go and check somewhere else". There'
apache.org
> Subject: Re: [GitHub] groovy pull request: Link to MrHaki's blog in
> TupleConstructor jav...
>
> I agree with Cédric.
> It'd be better to integrate the actual tips in the JavaDocs per se.
> Furthermore, the Groovy's GroovyDoc can also contai
44 91 88, Skype: sbglasius
--- Press ESC once to quit - twice to save the changes.
From: Guillaume Laforge
Reply: dev@groovy.apache.org
Date: February 26, 2016 at 10:53:07
To: dev@groovy.apache.org
Subject: Re: [GitHub] groovy pull request: Link to MrHaki's blog in
TupleConstructor ja
I agree with Cédric.
It'd be better to integrate the actual tips in the JavaDocs per se.
Furthermore, the Groovy's GroovyDoc can also contain code samples that are
actually tested, with assertions.
So not only would that improve the documentation itself, without going
through another hoop to visit
If you're ready to introduce a link to an external resource in a Javadoc, I
think you should instead make an effort to improve this particular Javadoc.
I'm strongly against promoting blogs, tutorials, ... that are by nature
individual rather than community driven. That, independently of the quality
Also, people these days would usually consult documentation online sources than bother with locating any local javadoc/groovydoc documentation sources, hidden away in some local m2 repo cache (or is that just me?). That’d make a stale link somewhat less likely, outweighed by the goodness of Groovy
On Wed, 24 Feb 2016 at 16:30 Cédric Champeau
wrote:
> I don't think linking to external resources like this is a good idea. We
> don't own the end link, it can be dead very easily, especially in the
> future. I would rather improve the documentation.
>
While I understand the concern, I think thi
I don't think linking to external resources like this is a good idea. We
don't own the end link, it can be dead very easily, especially in the
future. I would rather improve the documentation.
2016-02-24 17:25 GMT+01:00 pledbrook :
> GitHub user pledbrook opened a pull request:
>
> https://gi
19 matches
Mail list logo
