Guido Casper wrote:
Guido Casper wrote:
Vadim Gritsenko wrote:
In all other situations, Carsten is right - this might cause backward incompatibility. This is important for user-facing classes. Should we start marking classes as internal, like "<b>INTERNAL!!!</b>" in javadoc or some such?
What about introducing @cocoon.usage tags I proposed a while ago like: @cocoon.usage published
or: @cocoon.usage flowscript
etc.
This might someday also be used to generate separate Javadocs for different APIs.
Hm, noone (but me :-) seems to like the idea.
Lack of answer doesn't mean people don't like the idea. I for one already proposed such a thing, but the work for marking classes is huge and not very motivating ;-)
So maybe it's a good idea to first have a quick vote about whether to mark internal classes as such or to mark "published classes/interfaces" as such (and then decide how to mark them).
+1 !
Sylvain
-- Sylvain Wallez Anyware Technologies http://www.apache.org/~sylvain http://www.anyware-tech.com { XML, Java, Cocoon, OpenSource }*{ Training, Consulting, Projects }
