Re: [lang] org.apache.commons.lang3.concurrent.Locks is missing Javadocs for ALL public methods

On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 4:33 PM Jochen Wiedmann wrote: > On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 2:19 PM Gary Gregory > wrote: > > > > Hi All and to the author of the new Locks class: It is missing Javadocs > for > > ALL public methods. > > > > May you please add t

Re: [lang] org.apache.commons.lang3.concurrent.Locks is missing Javadocs for ALL public methods

On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 2:19 PM Gary Gregory wrote: > > Hi All and to the author of the new Locks class: It is missing Javadocs for > ALL public methods. > > May you please add them? I will. Sorry for missing this. -- Look, that's why there's rules, understand? So

[lang] org.apache.commons.lang3.concurrent.Locks is missing Javadocs for ALL public methods

Hi All and to the author of the new Locks class: It is missing Javadocs for ALL public methods. May you please add them? Gary

Re: [lang] Missing Javadocs

Checkstyle can be used to enforce the presence of javadoc. At least the Travis CI build executes checkstyle and fails if checkstyle fails. Am 05.09.2019 um 18:04 schrieb sebb: Can the CI build be changed to fail the build when Javadoc is omitted? On Thu, 5 Sep 2019 at 17:00, Gary Gregory wrot

Re: [lang] Missing Javadocs

On Thu, Sep 5, 2019 at 12:10 PM sebb wrote: > Can the CI build be changed to fail the build when Javadoc is omitted? > Not that I found but I still added "javadoc:javadoc -Ddoclint=all" to GH builds to catch other mistakes. Gary > On Thu, 5 Sep 2019 at 17:00, Gary Gregory wrote: > > > > Hi A

Re: [lang] Missing Javadocs

Can the CI build be changed to fail the build when Javadoc is omitted? On Thu, 5 Sep 2019 at 17:00, Gary Gregory wrote: > > Hi All: > > The following interfaces were added a while back without class-level > Javadoc: > > org.apache.commons.lang3.Functions.FailableBiConsumer Throwable> > org.apache

[lang] Missing Javadocs

Hi All: The following interfaces were added a while back without class-level Javadoc: org.apache.commons.lang3.Functions.FailableBiConsumer org.apache.commons.lang3.Functions.FailableBiFunction org.apache.commons.lang3.Functions.FailableBiPredicate org.apache.commons.lang3.Functions.FailableCalla

[GitHub] sebkur commented on issue #1: Fix link to Javadocs

sebkur commented on issue #1: Fix link to Javadocs URL: https://github.com/apache/commons-build-plugin/pull/1#issuecomment-460833268 Thanks, now it's working. I just used it to regenerate the README.md: #2 This

[GitHub] garydgregory commented on issue #1: Fix link to Javadocs

garydgregory commented on issue #1: Fix link to Javadocs URL: https://github.com/apache/commons-build-plugin/pull/1#issuecomment-460823826 To use a SNAPSHOT build, you must specify it on the command line if you do not do so in your POM. For example: ```mvn -Dcommons.build

[GitHub] sebkur commented on issue #1: Fix link to Javadocs

sebkur commented on issue #1: Fix link to Javadocs URL: https://github.com/apache/commons-build-plugin/pull/1#issuecomment-460668139 Espescially this line looks to suspicous to me: [DEBUG] Extension realms for project org.apache.commons:commons-build-plugin:maven-plugin:1.10

[GitHub] sebkur commented on issue #1: Fix link to Javadocs

sebkur commented on issue #1: Fix link to Javadocs URL: https://github.com/apache/commons-build-plugin/pull/1#issuecomment-460667565 Okay, as a result I have this file in the local Maven repository: ~/.m2/repository/org/apache/commons/commons-build-plugin/1.10-SNAPSHOT/commons

[GitHub] garydgregory commented on issue #1: Fix link to Javadocs

garydgregory commented on issue #1: Fix link to Javadocs URL: https://github.com/apache/commons-build-plugin/pull/1#issuecomment-460345294 You have to build and install it first: 'mvn clean install'. This is an

[GitHub] sebkur commented on issue #1: Fix link to Javadocs

sebkur commented on issue #1: Fix link to Javadocs URL: https://github.com/apache/commons-build-plugin/pull/1#issuecomment-460343209 Can't figure out how to regenerate the README.md though. I try this: mvn commons-build:readme-md But it fails: [ERROR] No p

[GitHub] chtompki commented on issue #1: Fix link to Javadocs

chtompki commented on issue #1: Fix link to Javadocs URL: https://github.com/apache/commons-build-plugin/pull/1#issuecomment-460299962 Yes indeed, many thanks. This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To

[GitHub] garydgregory edited a comment on issue #1: Fix link to Javadocs

garydgregory edited a comment on issue #1: Fix link to Javadocs URL: https://github.com/apache/commons-build-plugin/pull/1#issuecomment-460298733 Thank you @sebkur ! This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service

[GitHub] garydgregory commented on issue #1: Fix link to Javadocs

garydgregory commented on issue #1: Fix link to Javadocs URL: https://github.com/apache/commons-build-plugin/pull/1#issuecomment-460298733 Thank you@sebkur!, This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To

[GitHub] garydgregory merged pull request #1: Fix link to Javadocs

garydgregory merged pull request #1: Fix link to Javadocs URL: https://github.com/apache/commons-build-plugin/pull/1 This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on GitHub

[GitHub] sebkur commented on issue #1: Fix link to Javadocs

sebkur commented on issue #1: Fix link to Javadocs URL: https://github.com/apache/commons-build-plugin/pull/1#issuecomment-460297548 Exactly, they are in the 'apidocs' folder, however if you look at the README.md, for example here: https://github.com/apache/commons-bcel it

[GitHub] sebkur opened a new pull request #1: Fix link to Javadocs

sebkur opened a new pull request #1: Fix link to Javadocs URL: https://github.com/apache/commons-build-plugin/pull/1 I noticed, in multiple projects, that in the README.md file, the link to the Javadocs is broken. I think this PR properly fixes this issue. Examples: https

[GitHub] commons-rdf pull request #45: COMMONSRDF-71: Update Javadocs link for RDF4J

Github user asfgit closed the pull request at: https://github.com/apache/commons-rdf/pull/45 --- - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org

[GitHub] commons-rdf issue #45: COMMONSRDF-71: Update Javadocs link for RDF4J

Github user wikier commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/commons-rdf/pull/45 Good catch. Maybe at some point we just want to have http://docs.rdf4j.org/javadoc/latest/ but LGTM. --- - To unsubscribe, e-m

Re: [fileupload] Remove @version tags from javadocs

On Jun 10, 2017 9:25 PM, "Bruno P. Kinoshita" wrote: Hi all, Looking at https://git.apache.org/, looks like commons-fileupload has been migrated to Git. Any objection to removing the @version tags from the code now? I believe these were used to show the last SVN commit, if my memory serves me w

[fileupload] Remove @version tags from javadocs

Hi all, Looking at https://git.apache.org/, looks like commons-fileupload has been migrated to Git. Any objection to removing the @version tags from the code now? I believe these were used to show the last SVN commit, if my memory serves me well, and are not supported in Git. So should be OK t

[GitHub] commons-rdf pull request #33: COMMONSRDF-59 - fix minor javadocs warnings

Github user asfgit closed the pull request at: https://github.com/apache/commons-rdf/pull/33 --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is

[GitHub] commons-rdf issue #33: COMMONSRDF-59 - fix minor javadocs warnings

Github user wikier commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/commons-rdf/pull/33 LGTM --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature enabled and wishes so, or if the fea

[GitHub] commons-rdf pull request #33: COMMONSRDF-59 - fix minor javadocs warnings

GitHub user acoburn opened a pull request: https://github.com/apache/commons-rdf/pull/33 COMMONSRDF-59 - fix minor javadocs warnings This add some missing `@return` values, fixes an HTML error and adds some text to two otherwise undocumented parameters. You can merge this pull

Re: [io] commons-io 2.5 release notes and Javadocs are the 2.4 versions

eleased [lang] several times, maybe I can help. Regarding the JavaDocs: For Lang it is a manual process to fix the JavaDoc links. All the sites are checked in to https://svn.apache.org/repos/infra/websites/production/commons/content/proper/ After a new release of [lang], I check out that area and mod

Re: [io] commons-io 2.5 release notes and Javadocs are the 2.4 versions

https://commons.apache.org/proper/commons-io/ correctly points to > https://commons.apache.org/proper/commons-io/upgradeto2_5.html but > that says "2.4-SNAPSHOT" and does not match [1]. > > It looks like the Javadocs aren't updated either, > > https://commons.apache.

[io] commons-io 2.5 release notes and Javadocs are the 2.4 versions

Hi, The Commons IO 2.5 release notes link at https://commons.apache.org/proper/commons-io/ correctly points to https://commons.apache.org/proper/commons-io/upgradeto2_5.html but that says "2.4-SNAPSHOT" and does not match [1]. It looks like the Javadocs aren't update

Re: [text] SANDBOX-483 Add changes and fix old Javadocs from [lang] that remained after the code porting

2014-12-13 4:21 GMT+01:00 : > > Repository: commons-text > Updated Branches: > refs/heads/master 87b789fbe -> 7570eb016 > > > SANDBOX-483 Add changes and fix old Javadocs from [lang] that remained > after the code porting > > > Project: http://git-wip-us.ap

Re: [compress] exclude _internal package from javadocs?

On 2014-01-12, Stefan Bodewig wrote: > I'm a bit torn on this and since I'll re-roll a new RC anyway I'd like > to see what others think about hiding internal packages. I've unhid it again and strengthened the "may change" warning as Sebb suggested. Making things explicit feels better to me. St

Re: [compress] exclude _internal package from javadocs?

+1 for hiding. If the internal classes were shaded from another artifact they wouldn't appear in the Javadoc, so let's be consistent and hide anything not meant for public usage. Emmanuel Bourg Le 12/01/2014 14:34, sebb a écrit : > On 12 January 2014 10:18, Stefan Bodewig wrote: > > I think it

RE: [compress] exclude _internal package from javadocs?

: dev@commons.apache.org Subject: [compress] exclude _internal package from javadocs? Compress holds a package that is public as an implementation detail but whose API isn't meant for public consumption.  The javadocs of said package state this in bold letters.[1] Current trunk will ev

Re: [compress] exclude _internal package from javadocs?

On 12 January 2014 10:18, Stefan Bodewig wrote: > Compress holds a package that is public as an implementation detail but > whose API isn't meant for public consumption. The javadocs of said > package state this in bold letters.[1] > > Current trunk will even go further and h

[compress] exclude _internal package from javadocs?

Compress holds a package that is public as an implementation detail but whose API isn't meant for public consumption. The javadocs of said package state this in bold letters.[1] Current trunk will even go further and hide the package from javadoc, but the only class inside is still refered

Re: svn commit: r893363 - /websites/production/commons/content/proper/commons-lang/javadocs/api-release/

s: > >> > >> > >> > https://svn-master.apache.org/repos/infra/websites/production/commons/content/proper/commons-lang > >> > >> > >> On 8 January 2014 22:19, wrote: > >> > Author: britter > >> > Date: Wed Jan 8 22:19:51 2014 >

Re: svn commit: r893363 - /websites/production/commons/content/proper/commons-lang/javadocs/api-release/

gt;> https://svn-master.apache.org/repos/infra/websites/production/commons/content/proper/commons-lang >> >> >> On 8 January 2014 22:19, wrote: >> > Author: britter >> > Date: Wed Jan 8 22:19:51 2014 >> > New Revision: 893363 >> > >>

Re: svn commit: r893363 - /websites/production/commons/content/proper/commons-lang/javadocs/api-release/

Revision: 893363 > > > > Log: > > Update latest release API docs > > > > Added: > > > websites/production/commons/content/proper/commons-lang/javadocs/api-release/ > > - copied from r893362, > websites/production/commons/content/proper/commons-lang

Re: svn commit: r893363 - /websites/production/commons/content/proper/commons-lang/javadocs/api-release/

n: 893363 > > Log: > Update latest release API docs > > Added: > > websites/production/commons/content/proper/commons-lang/javadocs/api-release/ > - copied from r893362, > websites/production/commons/content/pr

Re: [help] [pool] restoring javadocs to site

On 1/1/14, 9:37 AM, Mark Thomas wrote: > On 01/01/2014 17:15, Phil Steitz wrote: >> On 12/31/13, 2:50 PM, Phil Steitz wrote: >>> For the faint of heart, you can also do >>> mvn scm-publish:publish-scm -Dscmpublish.dryRunSorry >> mvn scm-publish:publish-scm -Dscmpublish.dryRun > I rather liked your

Re: [help] restoring javadocs to site

Phil Steitz wrote: > > >> On Dec 30, 2013, at 5:22 PM, Jörg Schaible wrote: >> >> Hi Phil, >> >> Phil Steitz wrote: >> >>> I ran with scissors and tried mvn site-deploy and it seems to have >>> (sic) *deleted* the previous javadoc versions from the site svn. >>> How can I get these back? Ho

Re: [help] [pool] restoring javadocs to site

On 01/01/2014 17:15, Phil Steitz wrote: > On 12/31/13, 2:50 PM, Phil Steitz wrote: >> For the faint of heart, you can also do >> mvn scm-publish:publish-scm -Dscmpublish.dryRunSorry > > mvn scm-publish:publish-scm -Dscmpublish.dryRun I rather liked your first version :) Mark --

Re: [help] [pool] restoring javadocs to site

On 12/31/13, 2:50 PM, Phil Steitz wrote: > On 12/31/13, 7:34 AM, sebb wrote: >> On 31 December 2013 04:54, Phil Steitz wrote: >>> On 12/30/13, 4:04 PM, Phil Steitz wrote: I ran with scissors and tried mvn site-deploy and it seems to have (sic) *deleted* the previous javadoc versions from

Re: [help] [pool] restoring javadocs to site

On 12/31/13, 7:34 AM, sebb wrote: > On 31 December 2013 04:54, Phil Steitz wrote: >> On 12/30/13, 4:04 PM, Phil Steitz wrote: >>> I ran with scissors and tried mvn site-deploy and it seems to have >>> (sic) *deleted* the previous javadoc versions from the site svn. >>> How can I get these back? H

Re: [help] [pool] restoring javadocs to site

On 12/31/13, 10:43 AM, Oliver Heger wrote: > Am 31.12.2013 19:09, schrieb Phil Steitz: >> On 12/31/13, 7:34 AM, sebb wrote: >>> On 31 December 2013 04:54, Phil Steitz wrote: On 12/30/13, 4:04 PM, Phil Steitz wrote: > I ran with scissors and tried mvn site-deploy and it seems to have >

Re: [help] [pool] restoring javadocs to site

Am 31.12.2013 19:09, schrieb Phil Steitz: > On 12/31/13, 7:34 AM, sebb wrote: >> On 31 December 2013 04:54, Phil Steitz wrote: >>> On 12/30/13, 4:04 PM, Phil Steitz wrote: I ran with scissors and tried mvn site-deploy and it seems to have (sic) *deleted* the previous javadoc versions fro

Re: [help] [pool] restoring javadocs to site

On 12/31/13, 7:34 AM, sebb wrote: > On 31 December 2013 04:54, Phil Steitz wrote: >> On 12/30/13, 4:04 PM, Phil Steitz wrote: >>> I ran with scissors and tried mvn site-deploy and it seems to have >>> (sic) *deleted* the previous javadoc versions from the site svn. >>> How can I get these back? H

Re: [help] [pool] restoring javadocs to site

On 31 December 2013 04:54, Phil Steitz wrote: > On 12/30/13, 4:04 PM, Phil Steitz wrote: >> I ran with scissors and tried mvn site-deploy and it seems to have >> (sic) *deleted* the previous javadoc versions from the site svn. >> How can I get these back? How can I avoid this trauma each time I >

Re: [help] [pool] restoring javadocs to site

On 12/30/13, 4:04 PM, Phil Steitz wrote: > I ran with scissors and tried mvn site-deploy and it seems to have > (sic) *deleted* the previous javadoc versions from the site svn. > How can I get these back? How can I avoid this trauma each time I > try to publish the site? I guess I can just cp th

Re: [help] restoring javadocs to site

> On Dec 30, 2013, at 5:22 PM, Jörg Schaible wrote: > > Hi Phil, > > Phil Steitz wrote: > >> I ran with scissors and tried mvn site-deploy and it seems to have >> (sic) *deleted* the previous javadoc versions from the site svn. >> How can I get these back? How can I avoid this trauma each ti

Re: [help] restoring javadocs to site

Hi Phil, Phil Steitz wrote: > I ran with scissors and tried mvn site-deploy and it seems to have > (sic) *deleted* the previous javadoc versions from the site svn. > How can I get these back? How can I avoid this trauma each time I > try to publish the site? I guess I can just cp the local mvn

Re: [help] restoring javadocs to site

I could never get that to work for Convert either. I just update the site manually by committing the local changes. Adrian Crum Sandglass Software www.sandglass-software.com On 12/30/2013 7:04 PM, Phil Steitz wrote: I ran with scissors and tried mvn site-deploy and it seems to have (sic) *dele

[help] restoring javadocs to site

I ran with scissors and tried mvn site-deploy and it seems to have (sic) *deleted* the previous javadoc versions from the site svn. How can I get these back? How can I avoid this trauma each time I try to publish the site? I guess I can just cp the local mvn site gen to a direct checkout the svn

Re: javadocs

n an already lengthy and error prone release process. Ugh. > > Gary > > > On Mon, Dec 2, 2013 at 4:07 AM, Jörg Schaible > wrote: > > > Hi folks, > > > > it seems we have currently a great diversity with the provided javadocs > of > > our components. Som

Re: javadocs

Hi folks, > > it seems we have currently a great diversity with the provided javadocs of > our components. Some provide the latest one from trunk only, some provide > also a link the the latest one released and some have links to the > individual releases. However, after updating

javadocs

Hi folks, it seems we have currently a great diversity with the provided javadocs of our components. Some provide the latest one from trunk only, some provide also a link the the latest one released and some have links to the individual releases. However, after updating some links in our Maven

Re: [math] Links to documents in javadocs for moment computation

eitz > wrote: > > > >> On 11/16/13 3:55 AM, Ajo Fod wrote: > >>> Hello, > >>> > >>> The document: > >>> > >> > http://commons.apache.org/proper/commons-math/javadocs/api-3.2/index.htmlis > >>> relevant to First/S

Re: [math] Links to documents in javadocs for moment computation

ion I will gladly add it. Phil > > Cheers, > -Ajo. > > > On Sat, Nov 16, 2013 at 11:34 AM, Phil Steitz wrote: > >> On 11/16/13 3:55 AM, Ajo Fod wrote: >>> Hello, >>> >>> The document: >>> >> http://commons.apache.org/proper/commons-ma

Re: [math] Links to documents in javadocs for moment computation

Ajo Fod wrote: > > Hello, > > > > The document: > > > http://commons.apache.org/proper/commons-math/javadocs/api-3.2/index.htmlis > > relevant to First/Second/Moments, could someone add it to those > > classes > > as well? > > The javadoc for first

Re: [math] Links to documents in javadocs for moment computation

On 11/16/13 3:55 AM, Ajo Fod wrote: > Hello, > > The document: > http://commons.apache.org/proper/commons-math/javadocs/api-3.2/index.htmlis > relevant to First/Second/Moments, could someone add it to those > classes > as well? The javadoc for first and second moments and v

Re: [math] Links to documents in javadocs for moment computation

... being relevant to the First/Second/... Moments. -Ajo On Sat, Nov 16, 2013 at 3:55 AM, Ajo Fod wrote: > Hello, > > The document: > http://commons.apache.org/proper/commons-math/javadocs/api-3.2/index.htmlis > relevant to First/Second/Moments, could someone add it

[math] Links to documents in javadocs for moment computation

Hello, The document: http://commons.apache.org/proper/commons-math/javadocs/api-3.2/index.htmlis relevant to First/Second/Moments, could someone add it to those classes as well? This link is already documented in : *org.apache.commons.math3.stat.correlation.StorelessCovariance*

Re: [ALL] maven-scm-publish-plugin and javadocs**

AFAIK this concern javadocs of previous versions not the current one. 2013/5/18 sebb : > On 17 May 2013 18:33, Gary Gregory wrote: >> On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 1:26 PM, sebb wrote: >> >>> On 17 May 2013 18:22, Gary Gregory wrote: >>> > Hi All: >

Re: [ALL] maven-scm-publish-plugin and javadocs**

org.apache.maven.plugins >> > maven-scm-publish-plugin >> > >> > >> > javadocs** >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > Should that be in the parent? >>

Re: [ALL] maven-scm-publish-plugin and javadocs**

On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 1:26 PM, sebb wrote: > On 17 May 2013 18:22, Gary Gregory wrote: > > Hi All: > > > > I see in several components: > > > > > > org.apache.maven.plugins > > maven-scm-publish-plugin > >

Re: [ALL] maven-scm-publish-plugin and javadocs**

On 17 May 2013 18:22, Gary Gregory wrote: > Hi All: > > I see in several components: > > > org.apache.maven.plugins > maven-scm-publish-plugin > > > javadocs** > >

[ALL] maven-scm-publish-plugin and javadocs**

Hi All: I see in several components: org.apache.maven.plugins maven-scm-publish-plugin javadocs** Should that be in the parent? If so, can you then ADD ignorePathsToDelete, like Commons Logging

Re: Bad link in the javadocs

Fixed and tracked with https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CODEC-170 Gary On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 3:33 AM, Henri Yandell wrote: > I'm not sure if metacpan is fine, but it has a working link for the > package: > > https://metacpan.org/source/MSCHWERN/Text-Metaphone-1.96/ > > Hen > > On Mon, A

Re: Bad link in the javadocs

I'm not sure if metacpan is fine, but it has a working link for the package: https://metacpan.org/source/MSCHWERN/Text-Metaphone-1.96/ Hen On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 3:42 AM, Gary Gregory wrote: > Hi Ron, > > Thank you for the report. Can you create a JIRA for this please? Do > you have a fix perc

Re: Bad link in the javadocs

Hi Ron, Thank you for the report. Can you create a JIRA for this please? Do you have a fix perchance? Gary On Apr 29, 2013, at 1:53, Ron Wheeler wrote: > http://commons.apache.org/proper/commons-codec/apidocs/org/apache/commons/codec/language/Metaphone.html > > "Note, that this does not match

Bad link in the javadocs

http://commons.apache.org/proper/commons-codec/apidocs/org/apache/commons/codec/language/Metaphone.html "Note, that this does not match the algorithm that ships with PHP, or the algorithm found in the Perl Text:Metaphone-1.96

Re: [all] What happened to the old javadocs report?

Le 01/04/2013 13:49, Gary Gregory a écrit : > That is a shame because it is quite useful. Well, that depends on the target audience. For the developers it's indeed useful, but as part of the site for the average users it isn't very interesting. Emmanuel Bourg smime.p7s Description: Signature

Re: [all] What happened to the old javadocs report?

On Apr 1, 2013, at 6:31, Olivier Lamy wrote: > 2013/3/29 Phil Steitz : >> I can't remember if this died with m1, but in the old days we used >> to get a javadoc error report in maven project reports. It seems >> now the only way to tell if there are javadoc errors is to examine >> the command li

Re: [all] What happened to the old javadocs report?

2013/3/29 Phil Steitz : > I can't remember if this died with m1, but in the old days we used > to get a javadoc error report in maven project reports. It seems > now the only way to tell if there are javadoc errors is to examine > the command line output of the javadoc plugin. Is there a way to >

[all] What happened to the old javadocs report?

I can't remember if this died with m1, but in the old days we used to get a javadoc error report in maven project reports. It seems now the only way to tell if there are javadoc errors is to examine the command line output of the javadoc plugin. Is there a way to get a javadoc error report genera

[functor] Rename CollectionTransformer and update javadocs

ore elements. I'm +1 for changing this behaviour too and returning a new list for each call of evaluate(Generator). This way we don't have to worry about multiple threads accessing the same list object. If nobody is against this I will file an issue to work on this.  Finally, th

Re: [lang] Please fix DateParser Javadocs

I just read the thread from comm...@c.a.org. Please ignore my last post. Am 29.02.2012 19:25, schrieb Benedikt Ritter: Am 29.02.2012 17:54, schrieb sebb: On 29 February 2012 16:11, Benedikt Ritter wrote: Am 29.02.2012 15:28, schrieb Gary Gregory: Can someone please fix: [WARNING] C:\svn\or

Re: [lang] Please fix DateParser Javadocs

Am 29.02.2012 17:54, schrieb sebb: On 29 February 2012 16:11, Benedikt Ritter wrote: Am 29.02.2012 15:28, schrieb Gary Gregory: Can someone please fix: [WARNING] C:\svn\org\apache\commons\trunks-proper\lang\src\main\java\org\apache\commons\lang3\time\DateParser.java:75: warning - Tag @link:

Re: [lang] Please fix DateParser Javadocs

On 29 February 2012 16:11, Benedikt Ritter wrote: > Am 29.02.2012 15:28, schrieb Gary Gregory: > >> Can someone please fix: >> >> [WARNING] >> >> C:\svn\org\apache\commons\trunks-proper\lang\src\main\java\org\apache\commons\lang3\time\DateParser.java:75: >> warning - Tag @link: can't find getTimeZ

Re: [lang] Please fix DateParser Javadocs

On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 11:11 AM, Benedikt Ritter wrote: > Am 29.02.2012 15:28, schrieb Gary Gregory: > > Can someone please fix: >> >> [WARNING] >> C:\svn\org\apache\commons\**trunks-proper\lang\src\main\** >> java\org\apache\commons\lang3\**time\DateParser.java:75: >> warning - Tag @link: can't

Re: [lang] Please fix DateParser Javadocs

Am 29.02.2012 15:28, schrieb Gary Gregory: Can someone please fix: [WARNING] C:\svn\org\apache\commons\trunks-proper\lang\src\main\java\org\apache\commons\lang3\time\DateParser.java:75: warning - Tag @link: can't find getTimeZo neOverridesCalendar() in org.apache.commons.lang3.time.DateParser

Re: [compress] Keep old Javadocs?

On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 9:56 AM, Stefan Bodewig wrote: > On 2011-07-25, wrote: > >> If the URL do include the version, then it would be better to keep old >> version online, to avoid dangling links from external web pages, mail >> archives or documentation. > > Good point, thanks Luc.  The Javado

Re: [compress] Keep old Javadocs?

On 2011-07-25, wrote: > If the URL do include the version, then it would be better to keep old > version online, to avoid dangling links from external web pages, mail > archives or documentation. Good point, thanks Luc. The Javadoc URLs for Compress currently don't contain a version number so t

Re: [compress] Keep old Javadocs?

Hi Stefan, - Mail original - > Hi all, > > some components keep the Javadocs for older versions online in > addition > to the ones of the current release. In our case the Javadocs for 1.2 > won't be too different from the ones of 1.1, so I don't think it is

Re: [compress] Keep old Javadocs?

Hi Stefan!!! I think that keeping old javadocs would have more sense when we release major releases, for cases such as compress 1.1 -> 1.2, tags like @since, @deprecated, ... are more than enough. just my 2 cents, have a nice day!!! Simo http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/ http://

[compress] Keep old Javadocs?

Hi all, some components keep the Javadocs for older versions online in addition to the ones of the current release. In our case the Javadocs for 1.2 won't be too different from the ones of 1.1, so I don't think it is worthwhile, but still I'd like to double check. Does anybody wa

Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Javadocs for current releases

Oops sorry, wrong list! On 06/03/2010, sebb wrote: > The votes are: > > +1 > Oleg (binding) > Asankha (binding) > Sebb (binding) > Erik Hubert > > There were no other votes, so the vote passes. > > I'll upload the jars shortly. > > > S/// > ---

[RESULT][VOTE] Javadocs for current releases

The votes are: +1 Oleg (binding) Asankha (binding) Sebb (binding) Erik Hubert There were no other votes, so the vote passes. I'll upload the jars shortly. S/// - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For a

Commons Lang: JavaDocs (SVN Latest)

The "JavaDocs (SVN Latest)" link points to 3.0, but 2.4 is actually the latest version being maintained. Can that be repointed? Or a 2.4-SNAPSHOTlink be added?