That is a good idea. I would like to have Javadocs valid when going through them in IDE. To enforce it, we would have to fix it first. If we find a way how to validate Javadocs without actually rendering them, that would be cool.
There is a lot of legacy and rewriting of some custom-crafted formatting of some comments might be quite a tedious task to do if it is required to have them valid. I am in general for valid documentation and even enforcing it but what to do with what is already there ... ________________________________________ From: Jacek Lewandowski <lewandowski.ja...@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, August 2, 2023 23:38 To: dev@cassandra.apache.org Subject: Re: [DISCUSSION] Shall we remove ant javadoc task? NetApp Security WARNING: This is an external email. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. With or without outputting JavaDoc to HTML, there are some errors which we should maybe fix. We want to keep the documentation, but there can be syntax errors which may prevent IDE generating a proper preview. So, the question is - should we validate the JavaDoc comments as a precommit task? Can it be done without actually generating HTML output? Thanks, Jacek śr., 2 sie 2023, 22:24 użytkownik Derek Chen-Becker <de...@chen-becker.org<mailto:de...@chen-becker.org>> napisał: Oh, whoops, I guess I'm the only one that thinks Javadoc is just the tool and/or it's output (not the markup itself) :P If anything, the codebase could use a little more package/class/method markup in some places, so I'm definitely only in favor of getting rid of the ant task. I should amend my statement to be "...I suspect most people are not opening their browsers and looking at Javadoc..." :) Cheers, Derek On Wed, Aug 2, 2023, 1:30 PM Josh McKenzie <jmcken...@apache.org<mailto:jmcken...@apache.org>> wrote: most people are not looking at Javadoc when working on the codebase. I definitely use it extensively inside the IDE. But never as a compiled set of external docs. Which is to say, I'm +1 on removing the target and I'd ask everyone to keep javadoccing your classes and methods where things are non-obvious or there's a logical coupling with something else in the system. :) On Wed, Aug 2, 2023, at 2:08 PM, Derek Chen-Becker wrote: +1. If a need comes up for Javadoc we can fix it at that point, but I suspect most people are not looking at Javadoc when working on the codebase. Cheers, Derek On Wed, Aug 2, 2023 at 11:11 AM Brandon Williams <dri...@gmail.com<mailto:dri...@gmail.com>> wrote: I don't think even if it works anyone is going to use the output, so I'm good with removal. Kind Regards, Brandon On Wed, Aug 2, 2023 at 11:50 AM Ekaterina Dimitrova <e.dimitr...@gmail.com<mailto:e.dimitr...@gmail.com>> wrote: > > Hi everyone, > We were looking into a user report around our ant javadoc task recently. > That made us realize it is not run in CI; it finishes successfully even if > there are hundreds of errors, some potentially breaking doc pages. > > There was a ticket discussion where a few community members mentioned that > this task was probably unnecessary. Can we remove it, or shall we fix it? > > Best regards, > Ekaterina -- +---------------------------------------------------------------+ | Derek Chen-Becker | | GPG Key available at https://keybase.io/dchenbecker<https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fkeybase.io%2Fdchenbecker&data=05%7C01%7CStefan.Miklosovic%40netapp.com%7C7ca04f0f58764996ab1e08db93a0de2a%7C4b0911a0929b4715944bc03745165b3a%7C0%7C0%7C638266091373361824%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=n%2BrDfikzzoQG%2Fg%2BRvNqEEE6vHP8ZmY1skeosesLK9v0%3D&reserved=0> and | | https://pgp.mit.edu/pks/lookup?search=derek%40chen-becker.org<https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpgp.mit.edu%2Fpks%2Flookup%3Fsearch%3Dderek%2540chen-becker.org&data=05%7C01%7CStefan.Miklosovic%40netapp.com%7C7ca04f0f58764996ab1e08db93a0de2a%7C4b0911a0929b4715944bc03745165b3a%7C0%7C0%7C638266091373518054%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=Tnu5cIoIFZGqhaqOjCjW8yK%2BDTT2%2B0ifvFNs1pJO93s%3D&reserved=0> | | Fngrprnt: EB8A 6480 F0A3 C8EB C1E7 7F42 AFC5 AFEE 96E4 6ACC | +---------------------------------------------------------------+
