I don't have enough experience on the Java/Javadoc side to make a specific
suggestion, but with other languages I've used Sphinx and Doxygen with
great results.

Jon

On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 11:29 AM Michael Miklavcic <
[email protected]> wrote:

> Were you thinking javadoc or something more? I wouldn't mind seeing us
> produce a javadoc site, if we aren't already doing so.
>
> On Dec 20, 2016 9:25 AM, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Regarding documentation - while I'm not a huge fan of that approach (I
> > would prefer to see documentation generated from the code), I think it
> > could work in the short term.  Having that outlined both in the coding
> > guidelines and on the wiki would be important.
> >
> > I agree with the comments about author != committer, and 100% code
> > coverage.
> >
> > Jon
> >
> > On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 11:10 AM James Sirota <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >
> > > In my view the lower-level documentation that should be source
> controlled
> > > with the code belongs on github and then use case documentation and
> > > top-level architecture diagrams belong on the wiki.  What do you think?
> > >
> > > I think if the author is not a committer and can't merge then the
> > reviewer
> > > should probably merge or the PR originator should ping the dev board to
> > get
> > > someone to merge the PR in.  Does that seem reasonable to everyone?
> > >
> > > 18.12.2016, 13:10, "Kyle Richardson" <[email protected]>:
> > > > Couple of questions/comments:
> > > >
> > > > In 2.4, we talk about Javadoc and code comments but not too much
> about
> > > the
> > > > user documentation. Should we, possibly in a section 4, give some
> > > > recommendations on what should go into the README files versus on the
> > > wiki?
> > > > This could also help the reviewer know if the change is documented
> > > > sufficiently.
> > > >
> > > > In 2.6, we say that 1 qualified reviewer (Apache committer or PPMC
> > > member)
> > > > other than the author of the PR must have given it a +1. In the case
> > > where
> > > > the author is not a committer (who could merge their own PR), should
> we
> > > > state that the reviewer will be responsible for the merge?
> > > >
> > > > -Kyle
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 6:39 PM, James Sirota <[email protected]>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >>  Lets move this back to the discuss thread since it's still
> generating
> > > that
> > > >>  many comments. Please post all your feedback and I will incorporate
> > it
> > > and
> > > >>  put it back to a vote.
> > > >>
> > > >>  Thanks,
> > > >>  James
> > > >>
> > > >>  16.12.2016, 16:12, "Matt Foley" <[email protected]>:
> > > >>  > +1
> > > >>  >
> > > >>  > In 2.2 (follow Sun guidelines), do you want to add the notation
> > > “except
> > > >>  that indents are 2 spaces instead of 4”, as Hadoop does? Or does
> the
> > > Metron
> > > >>  community like 4-space indents? I see both in the Metron code.
> > > >>  >
> > > >>  > My +1 holds in either case.
> > > >>  > --Matt
> > > >>  >
> > > >>  > On 12/16/16, 9:34 AM, "James Sirota" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > >>  >
> > > >>  > I incorporated the changes to the coding guidelines from our
> > discuss
> > > >>  thread. I'd like to get them voted on to make them official.
> > > >>  >
> > > >>  > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.
> > > >>  action?pageId=61332235
> > > >>  >
> > > >>  > Please vote +1, -1, 0
> > > >>  >
> > > >>  > The vote will be open for 72 hours.
> > > >>  >
> > > >>  > -------------------
> > > >>  > Thank you,
> > > >>  >
> > > >>  > James Sirota
> > > >>  > PPMC- Apache Metron (Incubating)
> > > >>  > jsirota AT apache DOT org
> > > >>
> > > >>  -------------------
> > > >>  Thank you,
> > > >>
> > > >>  James Sirota
> > > >>  PPMC- Apache Metron (Incubating)
> > > >>  jsirota AT apache DOT org
> > >
> > > -------------------
> > > Thank you,
> > >
> > > James Sirota
> > > PPMC- Apache Metron (Incubating)
> > > jsirota AT apache DOT org
> > >
> > --
> >
> > Jon
> >
> > Sent from my mobile device
> >
>
-- 

Jon

Sent from my mobile device

Reply via email to