I wanted to add that fileset like functionality when I first updated javadoc (well, sent in the patch that got commited) but I didn't have the time. Ah well. Another TODO item. And your point is well taken about how often people build Javadocs. I should never have forgotten that old chestnut "Never assume anything. It makes an ass out of you and me." :-)
Glenn McAllister Software Developer. IBM Toronto Lab, (416) 448-3805 "An approximate answer to the right question is better than the right answer to the wrong question." - John W. Tukey Please respond to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] cc: Subject: Re: Exclude attribute to javadoc At 09:43 AM 10/20/00 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >Well, there are two ways we can fix this. Either add a matching task like >functionality to javadoc (which I'm not really willing to do with being so >close to a release) or copy the source tree into a clean directory and then >build the Javadoc. I agree it's best to wait to next release... > I'm leaning towards the latter becuase doing the >Javadoc is a farily infrequent event. False assumption. We have 80 developers working our project. Enough changes from day to day that we include a javadoc step in the nightly build. The developer's web page points to the product docs that are built. Also, we have 3 branches going, so that means javadoc in each branch each night. Let's see. 3 branches times 12 source bases - that's 36 a night, 365 days a year. I would not call that infrequent.... But, your solution will work until the matching task is added. In fact, it would make javadoc look much cleaner if we could list package names using something like the fileset or patternset the way we can with, say, jar or zip command...
