Yes thats what I do on all .java files, I'm not actually sure why we would put the header as a Javadoc. We dont particularly want it to show up visibly on the resulting documentation (and it isnt strictly required on generated files, only their source), and there isnt anything in there which we would need/want the javadoc parser to look at, so using comments seem more appropriate.
Robbie On 2 June 2015 at 14:51, Jeff Mesnil <[email protected]> wrote: > why don't you simply use simple comment (/* */) instead of Javadoc > comments (/** */) for the license headers? > > On Tue, Jun 2, 2015 at 3:30 PM, Clebert Suconic > <[email protected]> wrote: >> We have our package-info.java with a license header basically. Instead >> of showing a nice statement about what the package is meant for, this >> is translating as "Licensed to Apache" on every package that has a >> package-info.java >> >> http://activemq.apache.org/artemis/docs/javadocs/javadoc-1.0.0/index.html >> >> >> The only exception was Filters that used the html old version for the >> package. >> >> >> >> Can we stop adding License Headers on package-info.java and instead >> have a better documentation about what the package is meant for? that >> way the javadoc would translate better. >> >> >> Or does anyone know a syntax that would allow us to have a license >> header and still a meaninful doc about the package? >> >> >> Thanks > > > > -- > Jeff Mesnil > [email protected] > http://jmesnil.net/weblog/
