Both the PR build and the commit build should include a javadoc build
once we fix those. It's quite easy to break javadoc refs. You just add
javadocs, refactor stuff and boom.. javadoc gets broken.


On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 3:46 PM, Daniel Kulp <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> On Jun 8, 2015, at 6:47 PM, Clebert Suconic <[email protected]> 
>> wrote:
>>
>> True,
>>
>> although I think it makes sense to fix the javadoc stuff anyways to
>> not require that setting
>
> I started looking at this.  Definitely a lot more involved than I was 
> expecting.  It was definitely the right call to add the setting to get the 
> release out.
>
> At this point a “mvn -Pdev install” will now work without that setting.   
> That’s a good start.   The javadoc run in artemis-website now will run 
> without an error. (plenty of warnings though)   However, javadoc in the 
> individual modules still fails.   Since the javadoc in the modules is part of 
> the deploy (and release) process, we still need the switch.
>
> One step at a time…..
>
> Dan
>
>
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 8, 2015 at 6:41 PM, Hiram Chirino <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> I would not recommend exerting too much effort in maintaining Java 7
>>> support since Java 7 is EOL.  The only type of lib I would say should
>>> keep old Java support for is client libs.  There are some platforms
>>> out there that don't rev that quickly (stuff like GWT, Android, etc).
>>> Would it makes sense to keep clients libs in builds outside of
>>> Artemis?
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jun 8, 2015 at 5:57 PM, Clebert Suconic
>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> The first try was using profiles but it was kind of messy. This was
>>>> done very closely to the releases and I didn't have time to evaluate
>>>> any other options back then.
>>>>
>>>> If all we need is to fix javadoc, I would say we fix javadoc and
>>>> remove the java8 dependency (at least for now). I'm not sure yet how
>>>> difficult that would be though
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Jun 8, 2015 at 5:45 PM, Robbie Gemmell <[email protected]> 
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> Do you mean the -Xdoclint:none option? Javadoc is stricter with Java8
>>>>> and will refuse to process things that 'worked' with Java7. You can
>>>>> make it lenient again using the -Xdoclint config option, but that only
>>>>> works when using Java8 and so setting it then makes javadoc processing
>>>>> fail when building on Java7 since it doesnt understand the new config
>>>>> option.
>>>>>
>>>>> When I first hit this elsewhere I just updated all the javadoc to
>>>>> remove the errors seen using Java8, allowing things to work on 7 or 8
>>>>> without disabling doclint. You could possibly use profiles to apply
>>>>> the config selectively.
>>>>>
>>>>> Robbie
>>>>>
>>>>> On 8 June 2015 at 22:23, Clebert Suconic <[email protected]> 
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> The only thing I remember we had to add JDK 1.8 to the equation was
>>>>>> some option we needed for building javadocs. Perhaps there is a better
>>>>>> way to solve that.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Right now the codebase is not using anything specific to JDK 1.8.  (I
>>>>>> mean.. at least that's the idea. we could have slipped something.. but
>>>>>> I don't recall anything specific to java8 in the codebase)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, Jun 8, 2015 at 2:35 PM, Daniel Kulp <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>> I’ve updated a bunch of things so that Artemis now loads fairly easily 
>>>>>>> into Eclipse without any errors for all the non-example things.    I 
>>>>>>> haven’t attempted the examples yet.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Just have a couple of questions:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 1) In the poms, we specify that Java8 is required to build, but java7 
>>>>>>> is used for the source/target.   Thus, Eclipse will pick up the Java7 
>>>>>>> runtime.  It seems to work OK so I’m kind of wondering why we require 
>>>>>>> Java8 to build.  Maybe in the examples someplace?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 2) artemis-dto has a profile for jdk-1.5.   I assume that is not needed 
>>>>>>> at all as there is no way it would ever be triggered.   I think the 
>>>>>>> ibmjdk profile in there is irrelevant as well? (seems to reference 
>>>>>>> things about differences between 1.5 and 1.6)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Daniel Kulp
>>>>>>> [email protected] - http://dankulp.com/blog
>>>>>>> Talend Community Coder - http://coders.talend.com
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Clebert Suconic
>>>>>> http://community.jboss.org/people/[email protected]
>>>>>> http://clebertsuconic.blogspot.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Clebert Suconic
>>>> http://community.jboss.org/people/[email protected]
>>>> http://clebertsuconic.blogspot.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Hiram Chirino
>>> Engineering | Red Hat, Inc.
>>> [email protected] | fusesource.com | redhat.com
>>> skype: hiramchirino | twitter: @hiramchirino
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Clebert Suconic
>> http://community.jboss.org/people/[email protected]
>> http://clebertsuconic.blogspot.com
>
> --
> Daniel Kulp
> [email protected] - http://dankulp.com/blog
> Talend Community Coder - http://coders.talend.com
>



-- 
Clebert Suconic
http://community.jboss.org/people/[email protected]
http://clebertsuconic.blogspot.com

Reply via email to