I have fixed all the javadoc issues on this PR:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/22 But I had to use annotation to remove the javadoc annotations on the maven-plugin. And the current maven used on the PR build is not compatible with it: https://builds.apache.org/job/ActiveMQ-Artemis-PR-Build/418/ So, @Daniel Can you bump the version at the commit build. Can you also add javadoc as a goal to the build, so we won't break javadoc ever again without being noticed @JustinBertram: Can you do the same @BruceSnyder: Can you add me to the PR user's as I requested on the private list, so I won't need to ask Daniel and Justin again for this kind of thing? :) I will send another commit to bump the minimal Maven version. On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 4:57 PM, Clebert Suconic <[email protected]> wrote: > 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 -- Clebert Suconic http://community.jboss.org/people/[email protected] http://clebertsuconic.blogspot.com
