Emmanuel Lecharny wrote:
> Bernd Fondermann wrote:
>> Julien Vermillard wrote:
>>  
>>> Hi,
>>> The followed rule for MINA Javadoc is :
>>>  - a comment in each class header
>>>  - doco on each public/protected method (or on the parent class public
>>>    method with inherited tags)
>>>
>>> The main point is to help user to understand the public API,
>>> for the internal doco it's more flexible and it's good to hear great
>>> feedback from Michael :)
>>>     
>>
>> Let's step back a little bit for a second for some general observations.
>>
>>   
> <snip/>
> 
>> So, back on topic.
>>
>> I don't think every single setter/getter method in Vysper needs javadoc.
>>   
> They are typically generated automatically by any decent IDE, it's  a no
> brainer.

That's where we disagree.
If it's a no brainer, nobody needs it.
If there is generated javadoc, you won't have an indication where
auto-generated doc might not be sufficient.

> But you are certainly right on the fact that Javadoc is more important
> for MINA, as it's more important for commons-XXX than anything else.
>> In Vysper's commit log history you will notice one or more doc'athons
>> where a lot of doc is added. I will keep doing that. It's fun.
>>   
> I don't think that only one way leads to Rome :)

Yeah, that's right, we won't get into fist fights about javadoc.
I'm not that type of guy! ;-)

  Bernd

Reply via email to