Thanks for looking into this for us Craig.
Seems like a big waste of effort for us to reinvent that wheel.
Besides if we document the methods incorrectly we probably won't be
spec compliant :-)
TTFN,
-bd-
On Jul 21, 2005, at 10:43 AM, Craig McClanahan wrote:
So, the question is about copying the JavaDocs from the RI's
jsf-api.jar file, but not the code? I'm gonna have to ask what the
precise rules are and get back to you on that.
Craig
On 7/21/05, Bruno Aranda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Sorry, that was the answer to the other proposal ;-)
For the JavaDoc stuff, le'ts hear what Craig can tell us...
Bruno
2005/7/21, Bruno Aranda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
+1
For me it is better to introduce a new dependency if we can create
better tests (and faster) than using nasty workarounds...
Bruno
2005/7/21, Bill Dudney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Hi All,
Is there an issue with copying the javadoc from the spec classes? I
remember someone said we could not use the jsf-api.jar file a long
time ago but the java doc is part of the spec. We should be able to
copy that correct? So I'd like to propose that as I'm adding
tests to
the javax.faces.* packages that I also add javadoc to these
classes.
Thoughts?
TTFN,
-bd-
