[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-15265?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17303653#comment-17303653
]
Chris M. Hostetter commented on SOLR-15265:
-------------------------------------------
{quote}It's a maven requirement – they are already published. The problem is
that they don't contain cross-references (at least not locally). So, for
example:
{quote}
Huh ... I did not realize that.
As far as the cross-linking problem being discussed in LUCENE-9849 - I don't
think that will actually affect/block work here the the ref-guide link checking?
if we unpack the lucene javadoc jars as part of the solr ref-guide build (using
local sub-dir names that match the lucene "module" names just like they
javadocs have on the lucene website), then we should have everything we need
... our "local" link checking ref-guide build can _always_ download & unpack
the various lucene-*-javadoc.jar files -- regardless of wether they are
"SNAPSHOT" jars or "release" jars -- while the "site" ref-guide build can
(continue to) point at {{http://lucene.apache.org/core/X_Y_0/}} (since we
should never be publishing a solr/ref-guide version that depends on
lucene-SNAPSHOTS.
The fact that there might be a bad/broken/invalid link _inside_ those javadocs
(LUCENE-9849) shouldn't matter, because the link checking logic (at least in
the ref-guide) isn't recursive.
When you mention the cross-linking problem, are you concerned about the more
general link checking logic that the "documentation" task uses to make sure we
don't have broken links in the solr/lucene javadocs? ... I'm not really
familiar at all with how that works (is it recursive?)
> decide if/how to validate lucene javadoc links
> ----------------------------------------------
>
> Key: SOLR-15265
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-15265
> Project: Solr
> Issue Type: Sub-task
> Security Level: Public(Default Security Level. Issues are Public)
> Reporter: Chris M. Hostetter
> Priority: Major
>
> From parent issue...
> {quote}
> come up with a longer term plan for if/how we want to "validate" links to
> lucene javadocs
> * we currently don't do any validation of links to "remote" urls in the
> ref-guide content – regardless of wether they are hardcoded or version
> specific via ivy properties
> * we may want to revisit that now ... either in general, or via some lucene
> specific logic (possibly via fetching lucene src or javadoc jars) since we
> have so many links to lucene class javadocs
> {quote}
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)
