Cool... I've pushed the Javadoc changes.. no more -Xdoclint... and minimal JDK = 1.7
We can bump it back to 1.8 whenever needed again. On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 9:43 PM, John D. Ament <[email protected]> wrote: > Added javadoc:javadoc to the PR builder job... > > John > > On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 9:19 PM Clebert Suconic <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> I found a way to not require bumping the version of maven. just add >> annotation processing to the plugin on the. >> >> >> But if someone could please add javadoc goal on the PR builds and >> build checks please? that's the only change needed for this now. >> >> On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 8:00 PM, Clebert Suconic >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> > 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 >> >> >> >> -- >> 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
