I am wondering about what kind of documentation you are thinking about.
We have so much documentation that I hardly know where to stop.
I think "blind" javadoc is just so much baloney. If there are any
specific use cases that require documentation I'm happy to discuss
that.
Kristian
ti., 27.
On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 07:49:37AM -0400, Jesse Glick wrote:
> On 11/19/2010 02:19 PM, Kristian Rosenvold wrote:
> > if it hurts you, make a patch; documentation upgrade, javadoc or code
> > changes
>
> The difficulty with submitting Javadoc changes is that if you need
> the Javadoc you probably
Reposting to an old thread, since I am still running into what seems to be
Maven 2 debris in the APIs.
On 11/19/2010 02:19 PM, Kristian Rosenvold wrote:
if it hurts you, make a patch; documentation upgrade, javadoc or code changes
The difficulty with submitting Javadoc changes is that if you
First - sorry about the time it took for me to produce this answer.
Things are hectic in Scandinavia for certain.
:)
All right - here we go.
2010/11/18 Kristian Rosenvold
[znip]
> As for the patterns discussion nothing specific is being said, so I'm
> eagerly anticipating specifics.
>
>
I got
fr., 19.11.2010 kl. 12.12 -0500, skrev Jesse Glick:
>So I think the issue is that older code never got fully documented or
>made foolproof, which is understandable given the focus on shipping
>3.0.
As usual it's about scratching an itch, this is open source. So if it
hurts you, make a patch; docume
On 11/18/2010 03:34 AM, Kristian Rosenvold wrote:
The rant is somewhat about seeing all these internal components.
A little bit, though it is generally easy to see from the package or class name that something should be considered an implementation. My slow learning curve has had to
do with th
re working.
Josef
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: nicolas de loof [mailto:nicolas.del...@gmail.com]
Gesendet: Montag, 15. November 2010 10:46
An: Maven Developers List
Betreff: Re: Use of standards in the Maven core
I may be wrong regarding maven3-core, but AFAIK most code (including so
Den 18.11.2010 08:32, skrev Lennart Jörelid:
[bit of rather funny rant/read znipped out]
I think the rant was a real good description of why/how working with
open source is fun ;)
Maven 3 must be regarded in the proper context to understand what
happened. At the implementation level
some for
Hello all,
On 11/15/2010 04:27 AM, Brett Porter wrote:
[znip]
> > We use quite a few nonstandard patterns and components within
> the Maven3 core - so let me suggest some refactoring ideas,
> which I believe will simplify and augment Maven's internals
> in upcoming releases.
>
> Model improv
On 11/15/2010 04:45 AM, nicolas de loof wrote:
AFAIK most code (including some
plugins) related to POM parsing use Xpp3Reader, as we don't provide an
abstraction API for POM parsing.
Along the same lines, http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MNG-4862 shows that org.apache.maven.model.ConfigurationCo
On 13/11/2010, at 12:57 AM, Lennart Jorelid wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> I must confess I appreciate standards in larger projects.
> Unless there are solid technology-based reasons not to use
> existing standards, I say we should strive to use standards
> as often as we can. If we do, we can acquire
I may be wrong regarding maven3-core, but AFAIK most code (including some
plugins) related to POM parsing use Xpp3Reader, as we don't provide an
abstraction API for POM parsing. Such a migration to JAXB (or other),
without consideration to the technical beneficts, would require a
compatibility laye
Hello all,
I must confess I appreciate standards in larger projects.
Unless there are solid technology-based reasons not to use
existing standards, I say we should strive to use standards
as often as we can. If we do, we can acquire better
feedback and more informed suggestions for improvement.
13 matches
Mail list logo
