Hi Konstantin Boudnik Are the things on groovy-lang not considered originating from Apache premises? The repository for the same is licensed to Apache and is in Apache's git repository. Am I missing something here?
On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 9:20 PM, Konstantin Boudnik <c...@apache.org> wrote: > There's another concern: docs of an Apache project has to originate, as the > source code, from Apache premises (Infra, etc.) While linking doesn't > exactly > violates this, it is still looks like "Ok, here's our documentation, but > for > this little piece you'd need to go and check somewhere else". There's also > potential licensing and IP clearance issues. > > If Groovy needs this piece of docs the best way would be to reach out to > MrHaki and persuade him to contribute the content to the Javadocs we > already > have. > > Cos > > On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 10:49AM, Cédric Champeau wrote: > > If you're ready to introduce a link to an external resource in a > Javadoc, I > > think you should instead make an effort to improve this particular > Javadoc. > > I'm strongly against promoting blogs, tutorials, ... that are by nature > > individual rather than community driven. That, independently of the > quality > > of the blog, or smartness of the author. We should think community first. > > > > 2016-02-26 9:22 GMT+01:00 Jesper Steen Møller <jes...@selskabet.org>: > > > > > Also, people these days would usually consult documentation online > sources > > > than bother with locating any local javadoc/groovydoc documentation > > > sources, hidden away in some local m2 repo cache (or is that just me?). > > > That’d make a stale link somewhat less likely, outweighed by the > goodness > > > of Groovy Goodness. > > > > > > -Jesper > > > > > > On 26. feb. 2016, at 08.35, Peter Ledbrook <pe...@cacoethes.co.uk> > wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, 24 Feb 2016 at 16:30 Cédric Champeau < > cedric.champ...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > >> I don't think linking to external resources like this is a good idea. > We > > >> don't own the end link, it can be dead very easily, especially in the > > >> future. I would rather improve the documentation. > > >> > > > > > > While I understand the concern, I think this is just one of the risks > of > > > the internet. The docs already have links to the Java API docs, perhaps > > > RFCs and other resources. Although you may have more confidence in > those > > > staying where they are, they may break in future. > > > > > > This is more about helping users in the short and medium term, in > > > recognition that bulking out the javadocs themselves isn't likely to > happen > > > at a fast pace. And I'm sure it's possible to run checks over the > generated > > > javadocs to ensure that all links are valid. In fact, I'd argue that > should > > > be in place already. Then we'd have some protection against any sudden > > > unavailability of Groovy Goodness. > > > > > > Peter > > > > > > -- > > > Peter Ledbrook > > > t: @pledbrook > > > w: http://www.cacoethes.co.uk/ > > > > > > > > > >
