As far as I know, the docck plugin was just a prototype that I was using to try to collect some basic information about the sate of documentation in the plugins. I don't think much has happened to it since then. I like all of your suggestions. It would be nice to eventually go even further, and somehow get into diagnosng missing docs inside the pages (since some pages might only be stubs).
Clearly, this plugin still has room for improvement! :-) -j On 6/26/06, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi all I've had a look at the docck plugin and I like what I see so far! A couple of questions that popped up along the way: There is a check to make sure there is an index.[apt|xml|...] file present. Shouldn't a lengthy description in the pom be good enough? If a parameter is missing a description, an error is reported stating the mojo goal where the error occurred. As a developer I think it would make more sense to report the class name, but that might not be available. In the check for the scm tag, an error is reported if *all* children are missing. Shouldn't that be if *any* of the children are missing? -- Dennis Lundberg --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
