Re: [ALL] Suppressing Javadoc errors with Java 8 - temporary hack

2014-05-02 Thread Mark Struberg 
Hi!

It turned out that it is always just a bit more complicated.
Romain detected that building OpenWebBeans with Java8 did lead to bytecode 
which does not work on ANY older JVM. The reason is that methods of 
ConcurrentHashMap (and possibly other) has been moved to an Interface. See 
OWB-952 [1] for more info.

This is ok and a known aspect from a general JVM perspective [2] but needs some 
caution on our side. Which also means that any TCK, unit tests whatever are NOT 
sufficient to prove backward compat with older platforms nor that it works on 
newer platforms.

My personal summary is that if we like to support java6 in commons-jcs, then we 
should really run the release with a jdk-1.6.


LieGrue,
strub



[1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-952
[2] https://blogs.oracle.com/darcy/entry/how_to_cross_compile_for





> On Thursday, 1 May 2014, 18:27, Bernd Eckenfels  
> wrote:
> > Am Thu, 1 May 2014 11:01:32 -0500
> schrieb Paul Benedict :
> 
>>  Wrong syntax is different than missing syntax. The former affects
>>  readability while the other just affects usability. Glad you found a
>>  way to catch the former but ignore the latter.
> 
> I agree with the "missing should be warning", but I don't see a 
> need to
> change the configuration. I just fixes the "self-closed" errors in 
> VFS2
> with javadoc8 and it now builds with no errors. It soes show missing
> @param @return and @throws but they are all warnings.
> 
> It is using commons-vfs2-project:2.1-SNAPSHOT which is using
> commons-parent:32 and none of those define Javadoc lint options (only
> quiet=true).
> 
> So I am not sure why you need to change the parents?
> 
> 
> I do see a problem with additional @todo tags. They are configured in
> the project parent, but it seems from the effective pom that they are
> not used in all invocations, at least they made the build fail (and I
> wrongly corrected them).
> 
> Bernd
> 
> 
>> 
>> 
>>  On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 5:22 AM, Mark Struberg 
>>  wrote:
>> 
>>  > Actually the ',' causes a bug in the maven-javadoc-plugin. 
> What
>>  > seems to work is to split it into 2 parts:
>>  >
>>  > -Xdoclint:all 
> -Xdoclint:-missing
>>  >
>>  > Already started a discussion about adding it to apache-parent over
>>  > in maven-dev.
>>  >
>>  > LieGrue,
>>  > strub
>>  >
>>  >
>>  >
>>  >
>>  >
>>  >
>>  >
>>  > > On Thursday, 1 May 2014, 11:05, Mark Struberg 
> 
>>  > > wrote:
>>  > > >> I would prefer it if the reports were warnings rather 
> than
>>  > > >> errors, but
>>  > >> generally they seem sensible.
>>  > >
>>  > >
>>  > > Allow me to disagree. Breaking the javadoc just because a @param
>>  > > is
>>  > missing is
>>  > > imo plain wrong.
>>  > >
>>  > > Usually parameters should be self-explaining. I personally only
>>  > > document interfaces and methods where it is *not* clear what the
>>  > > params intend.
>>  > >
>>  > >
>>  > > Please don't let us end up with tons of unnecessary (because
>>  > > obvious) Javadocs just to make java8 happy.
>>  > >
>>  > > I've done some research and asked some Java8 devs I know. 
> Seems
>>  > >
>>  > > 
> -Xdoclint:all,-missing
>>  > >
>>  > > could do the trick. Still need to test it though.
>>  > >
>>  > > We should btw add this to the apache-parent pom and not only to
>>  > commons-parent.
>>  > >
>>  > > LieGrue,
>>  > > strub
>>  > >
>>  > >
>>  > >
>>  > >
>>  > >
>>  > > On Wednesday, 16 April 2014, 20:51, sebb  
> wrote:
>>  > >
>>  > > On 16 April 2014 19:32, Gary Gregory 
> 
>>  > > wrote:
>>  > >>>  I personally like the default Java 8 behavior and I 
> would not
>>  > >>> want to disable it.
>>  > >>
>>  > >> I would prefer it if the reports were warnings rather than
>>  > >> errors, but generally they seem sensible.
>>  > >>
>>  > >> -1 to adding it to the parent POM as a default.
>>  > >> It might have been OK to do so if it were possible to 
> activate
>>  > >> it only when Java 8 is being used to a component that targets
>>  > >> Java 5,6,7. But suppressing DocLint for source that targets 
> Java
>>  > >> 8 seems a very bad
>>  > > idea.
>>  > >> Unfortunately ANDed activation conditions for profiles are
>>  > >> borked and have been for ages.
>>  > >>
>>  > >> I think it's OK to use in component POMs because each 
> component
>>  > >> will be different.
>>  > >> And it can be easily removed when the source has been 
> updated.
>>  > >>
>>  > >>>  Gary
>>  > >>>
>>  > >>>
>>  > >>>  On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 1:06 PM, Matt Benson
>>  > >  wrote:
>>  > >>>
>>  >   I think the implication was that adding it to the 
> parent POM
>>  >  would
>>  > > not
>>  >   encourage us to actually *solve* the underlying 
> issue. ;)
>>  > 
>>  >   Matt
>>  > 
>>  > 
>>  >   On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 12:02 PM, Emmanuel Bourg
>>  > > 
>>  >   wrote:
>>  > 
>>  >   > Le 16/04/2014 18:41, sebb AT ASF a écrit :
>>  >   > > See below for one way to automatically 
> suppress Javadoc
>>  > > errors when
>>  >   > > runni

Re: [ALL] Suppressing Javadoc errors with Java 8 - temporary hack

2014-05-01 Thread Bernd Eckenfels 
Am Thu, 1 May 2014 11:01:32 -0500
schrieb Paul Benedict :

> Wrong syntax is different than missing syntax. The former affects
> readability while the other just affects usability. Glad you found a
> way to catch the former but ignore the latter.

I agree with the "missing should be warning", but I don't see a need to
change the configuration. I just fixes the "self-closed" errors in VFS2
with javadoc8 and it now builds with no errors. It soes show missing
@param @return and @throws but they are all warnings.

It is using commons-vfs2-project:2.1-SNAPSHOT which is using
commons-parent:32 and none of those define Javadoc lint options (only
quiet=true).

So I am not sure why you need to change the parents?


I do see a problem with additional @todo tags. They are configured in
the project parent, but it seems from the effective pom that they are
not used in all invocations, at least they made the build fail (and I
wrongly corrected them).

Bernd


> 
> 
> On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 5:22 AM, Mark Struberg 
> wrote:
> 
> > Actually the ',' causes a bug in the maven-javadoc-plugin. What
> > seems to work is to split it into 2 parts:
> >
> > -Xdoclint:all -Xdoclint:-missing
> >
> > Already started a discussion about adding it to apache-parent over
> > in maven-dev.
> >
> > LieGrue,
> > strub
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > On Thursday, 1 May 2014, 11:05, Mark Struberg 
> > > wrote:
> > > >> I would prefer it if the reports were warnings rather than
> > > >> errors, but
> > >> generally they seem sensible.
> > >
> > >
> > > Allow me to disagree. Breaking the javadoc just because a @param
> > > is
> > missing is
> > > imo plain wrong.
> > >
> > > Usually parameters should be self-explaining. I personally only
> > > document interfaces and methods where it is *not* clear what the
> > > params intend.
> > >
> > >
> > > Please don't let us end up with tons of unnecessary (because
> > > obvious) Javadocs just to make java8 happy.
> > >
> > > I've done some research and asked some Java8 devs I know. Seems
> > >
> > > -Xdoclint:all,-missing
> > >
> > > could do the trick. Still need to test it though.
> > >
> > > We should btw add this to the apache-parent pom and not only to
> > commons-parent.
> > >
> > > LieGrue,
> > > strub
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wednesday, 16 April 2014, 20:51, sebb  wrote:
> > >
> > > On 16 April 2014 19:32, Gary Gregory 
> > > wrote:
> > >>>  I personally like the default Java 8 behavior and I would not
> > >>> want to disable it.
> > >>
> > >> I would prefer it if the reports were warnings rather than
> > >> errors, but generally they seem sensible.
> > >>
> > >> -1 to adding it to the parent POM as a default.
> > >> It might have been OK to do so if it were possible to activate
> > >> it only when Java 8 is being used to a component that targets
> > >> Java 5,6,7. But suppressing DocLint for source that targets Java
> > >> 8 seems a very bad
> > > idea.
> > >> Unfortunately ANDed activation conditions for profiles are
> > >> borked and have been for ages.
> > >>
> > >> I think it's OK to use in component POMs because each component
> > >> will be different.
> > >> And it can be easily removed when the source has been updated.
> > >>
> > >>>  Gary
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>  On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 1:06 PM, Matt Benson
> > >  wrote:
> > >>>
> >   I think the implication was that adding it to the parent POM
> >  would
> > > not
> >   encourage us to actually *solve* the underlying issue. ;)
> > 
> >   Matt
> > 
> > 
> >   On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 12:02 PM, Emmanuel Bourg
> > > 
> >   wrote:
> > 
> >   > Le 16/04/2014 18:41, sebb AT ASF a écrit :
> >   > > See below for one way to automatically suppress Javadoc
> > > errors when
> >   > > running under Java 8
> >   > >
> >   > > It should not be adopted as a permanent measure, but may
> > > be useful
> >   > > whilst Javadoc is being fixed.
> >   >
> >   > Can we add that to the parent pom?
> >   >
> >   > Emmanuel Bourg
> >   >
> >   >
> >   >
> > > -
> >   > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
> >   > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
> >   >
> >   >
> > 
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>  --
> > >>>  E-Mail: garydgreg...@gmail.com | ggreg...@apache.org
> > >>>  Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second
> > > Edition
> > >>>  JUnit in Action, Second Edition
> > > 
> > >>>  Spring Batch in Action 
> > >>>  Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
> > >>>  Home: http://garygregory.com/
> > >>>  Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
> > >
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> -
> > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
> > >> For additional comman

Re: [ALL] Suppressing Javadoc errors with Java 8 - temporary hack

2014-05-01 Thread Paul Benedict 
Wrong syntax is different than missing syntax. The former affects
readability while the other just affects usability. Glad you found a way to
catch the former but ignore the latter.


On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 5:22 AM, Mark Struberg  wrote:

> Actually the ',' causes a bug in the maven-javadoc-plugin. What seems to
> work is to split it into 2 parts:
>
> -Xdoclint:all -Xdoclint:-missing
>
> Already started a discussion about adding it to apache-parent over in
> maven-dev.
>
> LieGrue,
> strub
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Thursday, 1 May 2014, 11:05, Mark Struberg  wrote:
> > >> I would prefer it if the reports were warnings rather than errors, but
> >> generally they seem sensible.
> >
> >
> > Allow me to disagree. Breaking the javadoc just because a @param is
> missing is
> > imo plain wrong.
> >
> > Usually parameters should be self-explaining. I personally only document
> > interfaces and methods where it is *not* clear what the params intend.
> >
> >
> > Please don't let us end up with tons of unnecessary (because obvious)
> > Javadocs just to make java8 happy.
> >
> > I've done some research and asked some Java8 devs I know. Seems
> >
> > -Xdoclint:all,-missing
> >
> > could do the trick. Still need to test it though.
> >
> > We should btw add this to the apache-parent pom and not only to
> commons-parent.
> >
> > LieGrue,
> > strub
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Wednesday, 16 April 2014, 20:51, sebb  wrote:
> >
> > On 16 April 2014 19:32, Gary Gregory  wrote:
> >>>  I personally like the default Java 8 behavior and I would not want to
> >>>  disable it.
> >>
> >> I would prefer it if the reports were warnings rather than errors, but
> >> generally they seem sensible.
> >>
> >> -1 to adding it to the parent POM as a default.
> >> It might have been OK to do so if it were possible to activate it only
> >> when Java 8 is being used to a component that targets Java 5,6,7.
> >> But suppressing DocLint for source that targets Java 8 seems a very bad
> > idea.
> >> Unfortunately ANDed activation conditions for profiles are borked and
> >> have been for ages.
> >>
> >> I think it's OK to use in component POMs because each component will
> >> be different.
> >> And it can be easily removed when the source has been updated.
> >>
> >>>  Gary
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>  On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 1:06 PM, Matt Benson
> >  wrote:
> >>>
>   I think the implication was that adding it to the parent POM would
> > not
>   encourage us to actually *solve* the underlying issue. ;)
> 
>   Matt
> 
> 
>   On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 12:02 PM, Emmanuel Bourg
> > 
>   wrote:
> 
>   > Le 16/04/2014 18:41, sebb AT ASF a écrit :
>   > > See below for one way to automatically suppress Javadoc
> > errors when
>   > > running under Java 8
>   > >
>   > > It should not be adopted as a permanent measure, but may
> > be useful
>   > > whilst Javadoc is being fixed.
>   >
>   > Can we add that to the parent pom?
>   >
>   > Emmanuel Bourg
>   >
>   >
>   >
> > -
>   > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
>   > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
>   >
>   >
> 
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>  --
> >>>  E-Mail: garydgreg...@gmail.com | ggreg...@apache.org
> >>>  Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second
> > Edition
> >>>  JUnit in Action, Second Edition
> > 
> >>>  Spring Batch in Action 
> >>>  Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
> >>>  Home: http://garygregory.com/
> >>>  Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> -
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> > -
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
> >
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
>
>


-- 
Cheers,
Paul

Re: [ALL] Suppressing Javadoc errors with Java 8 - temporary hack

2014-05-01 Thread Mark Struberg 
Actually the ',' causes a bug in the maven-javadoc-plugin. What seems to work 
is to split it into 2 parts:

-Xdoclint:all -Xdoclint:-missing

Already started a discussion about adding it to apache-parent over in maven-dev.

LieGrue,
strub







> On Thursday, 1 May 2014, 11:05, Mark Struberg  wrote:
> >> I would prefer it if the reports were warnings rather than errors, but
>> generally they seem sensible.
> 
> 
> Allow me to disagree. Breaking the javadoc just because a @param is missing 
> is 
> imo plain wrong.
> 
> Usually parameters should be self-explaining. I personally only document 
> interfaces and methods where it is *not* clear what the params intend. 
> 
> 
> Please don't let us end up with tons of unnecessary (because obvious) 
> Javadocs just to make java8 happy.
> 
> I've done some research and asked some Java8 devs I know. Seems
> 
> -Xdoclint:all,-missing
> 
> could do the trick. Still need to test it though.
> 
> We should btw add this to the apache-parent pom and not only to 
> commons-parent.
> 
> LieGrue,
> strub
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Wednesday, 16 April 2014, 20:51, sebb  wrote:
> 
> On 16 April 2014 19:32, Gary Gregory  wrote:
>>>  I personally like the default Java 8 behavior and I would not want to
>>>  disable it.
>> 
>> I would prefer it if the reports were warnings rather than errors, but
>> generally they seem sensible.
>> 
>> -1 to adding it to the parent POM as a default.
>> It might have been OK to do so if it were possible to activate it only
>> when Java 8 is being used to a component that targets Java 5,6,7.
>> But suppressing DocLint for source that targets Java 8 seems a very bad 
> idea.
>> Unfortunately ANDed activation conditions for profiles are borked and
>> have been for ages.
>> 
>> I think it's OK to use in component POMs because each component will
>> be different.
>> And it can be easily removed when the source has been updated.
>> 
>>>  Gary
>>> 
>>> 
>>>  On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 1:06 PM, Matt Benson 
>  wrote:
>>> 
  I think the implication was that adding it to the parent POM would 
> not
  encourage us to actually *solve* the underlying issue. ;)
 
  Matt
 
 
  On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 12:02 PM, Emmanuel Bourg 
> 
  wrote:
 
  > Le 16/04/2014 18:41, sebb AT ASF a écrit :
  > > See below for one way to automatically suppress Javadoc 
> errors when
  > > running under Java 8
  > >
  > > It should not be adopted as a permanent measure, but may 
> be useful
  > > whilst Javadoc is being fixed.
  >
  > Can we add that to the parent pom?
  >
  > Emmanuel Bourg
  >
  >
  > 
> -
  > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
  > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
  >
  >
 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>  --
>>>  E-Mail: garydgreg...@gmail.com | ggreg...@apache.org
>>>  Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second 
> Edition
>>>  JUnit in Action, Second Edition 
> 
>>>  Spring Batch in Action 
>>>  Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
>>>  Home: http://garygregory.com/
>>>  Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
> 
>> 
>> 
>> -
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org

Re: [ALL] Suppressing Javadoc errors with Java 8 - temporary hack

2014-05-01 Thread Mark Struberg 
>I would prefer it if the reports were warnings rather than errors, but
>generally they seem sensible.


Allow me to disagree. Breaking the javadoc just because a @param is missing is 
imo plain wrong.

Usually parameters should be self-explaining. I personally only document 
interfaces and methods where it is *not* clear what the params intend. 


Please don't let us end up with tons of unnecessary (because obvious) Javadocs 
just to make java8 happy.

I've done some research and asked some Java8 devs I know. Seems

-Xdoclint:all,-missing

could do the trick. Still need to test it though.

We should btw add this to the apache-parent pom and not only to commons-parent.

LieGrue,
strub





On Wednesday, 16 April 2014, 20:51, sebb  wrote:

On 16 April 2014 19:32, Gary Gregory  wrote:
>> I personally like the default Java 8 behavior and I would not want to
>> disable it.
>
>I would prefer it if the reports were warnings rather than errors, but
>generally they seem sensible.
>
>-1 to adding it to the parent POM as a default.
>It might have been OK to do so if it were possible to activate it only
>when Java 8 is being used to a component that targets Java 5,6,7.
>But suppressing DocLint for source that targets Java 8 seems a very bad idea.
>Unfortunately ANDed activation conditions for profiles are borked and
>have been for ages.
>
>I think it's OK to use in component POMs because each component will
>be different.
>And it can be easily removed when the source has been updated.
>
>> Gary
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 1:06 PM, Matt Benson  wrote:
>>
>>> I think the implication was that adding it to the parent POM would not
>>> encourage us to actually *solve* the underlying issue. ;)
>>>
>>> Matt
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 12:02 PM, Emmanuel Bourg 
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> > Le 16/04/2014 18:41, sebb AT ASF a écrit :
>>> > > See below for one way to automatically suppress Javadoc errors when
>>> > > running under Java 8
>>> > >
>>> > > It should not be adopted as a permanent measure, but may be useful
>>> > > whilst Javadoc is being fixed.
>>> >
>>> > Can we add that to the parent pom?
>>> >
>>> > Emmanuel Bourg
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > -
>>> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
>>> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> E-Mail: garydgreg...@gmail.com | ggreg...@apache.org
>> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second 
>> Edition
>> JUnit in Action, Second Edition 
>> Spring Batch in Action 
>> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
>> Home: http://garygregory.com/
>> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
>
>
>-
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
>For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
>
>
>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org

Re: [ALL] Suppressing Javadoc errors with Java 8 - temporary hack

2014-04-16 Thread sebb 
On 16 April 2014 19:32, Gary Gregory  wrote:
> I personally like the default Java 8 behavior and I would not want to
> disable it.

I would prefer it if the reports were warnings rather than errors, but
generally they seem sensible.

-1 to adding it to the parent POM as a default.
It might have been OK to do so if it were possible to activate it only
when Java 8 is being used to a component that targets Java 5,6,7.
But suppressing DocLint for source that targets Java 8 seems a very bad idea.
Unfortunately ANDed activation conditions for profiles are borked and
have been for ages.

I think it's OK to use in component POMs because each component will
be different.
And it can be easily removed when the source has been updated.

> Gary
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 1:06 PM, Matt Benson  wrote:
>
>> I think the implication was that adding it to the parent POM would not
>> encourage us to actually *solve* the underlying issue. ;)
>>
>> Matt
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 12:02 PM, Emmanuel Bourg 
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Le 16/04/2014 18:41, sebb AT ASF a écrit :
>> > > See below for one way to automatically suppress Javadoc errors when
>> > > running under Java 8
>> > >
>> > > It should not be adopted as a permanent measure, but may be useful
>> > > whilst Javadoc is being fixed.
>> >
>> > Can we add that to the parent pom?
>> >
>> > Emmanuel Bourg
>> >
>> >
>> > -
>> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
>> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
>> >
>> >
>>
>
>
>
> --
> E-Mail: garydgreg...@gmail.com | ggreg...@apache.org
> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second 
> Edition
> JUnit in Action, Second Edition 
> Spring Batch in Action 
> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
> Home: http://garygregory.com/
> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org

Re: [ALL] Suppressing Javadoc errors with Java 8 - temporary hack

2014-04-16 Thread Gary Gregory 
I personally like the default Java 8 behavior and I would not want to
disable it.

Gary


On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 1:06 PM, Matt Benson  wrote:

> I think the implication was that adding it to the parent POM would not
> encourage us to actually *solve* the underlying issue. ;)
>
> Matt
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 12:02 PM, Emmanuel Bourg 
> wrote:
>
> > Le 16/04/2014 18:41, sebb AT ASF a écrit :
> > > See below for one way to automatically suppress Javadoc errors when
> > > running under Java 8
> > >
> > > It should not be adopted as a permanent measure, but may be useful
> > > whilst Javadoc is being fixed.
> >
> > Can we add that to the parent pom?
> >
> > Emmanuel Bourg
> >
> >
> > -
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
> >
> >
>



-- 
E-Mail: garydgreg...@gmail.com | ggreg...@apache.org
Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
JUnit in Action, Second Edition 
Spring Batch in Action 
Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
Home: http://garygregory.com/
Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory

Re: [ALL] Suppressing Javadoc errors with Java 8 - temporary hack

2014-04-16 Thread Emmanuel Bourg 
Le 16/04/2014 19:06, Matt Benson a écrit :
> I think the implication was that adding it to the parent POM would not
> encourage us to actually *solve* the underlying issue. ;)

Well, I think defining this as an 'issue' is probably debatable :) The
Javadoc isn't broken and I'd rather invest our time in more important
areas. FYI Fedora disabled doclint by default in its OpenJDK 8 package
and Debian will do the same.

Emmanuel Bourg


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org

Re: [ALL] Suppressing Javadoc errors with Java 8 - temporary hack

2014-04-16 Thread Matt Benson 
I think the implication was that adding it to the parent POM would not
encourage us to actually *solve* the underlying issue. ;)

Matt


On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 12:02 PM, Emmanuel Bourg  wrote:

> Le 16/04/2014 18:41, sebb AT ASF a écrit :
> > See below for one way to automatically suppress Javadoc errors when
> > running under Java 8
> >
> > It should not be adopted as a permanent measure, but may be useful
> > whilst Javadoc is being fixed.
>
> Can we add that to the parent pom?
>
> Emmanuel Bourg
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
>
>

Re: [ALL] Suppressing Javadoc errors with Java 8 - temporary hack

2014-04-16 Thread Emmanuel Bourg 
Le 16/04/2014 18:41, sebb AT ASF a écrit :
> See below for one way to automatically suppress Javadoc errors when
> running under Java 8
> 
> It should not be adopted as a permanent measure, but may be useful
> whilst Javadoc is being fixed.

Can we add that to the parent pom?

Emmanuel Bourg


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org