Jon Stevens wrote:
> > I don't know if this is still true, but I have seen a few
> > java files in the Turbine snapshots with incomplete and/or
> > inconsistent documentation (missing @param or @return, etc.)
> > I would like to volunteer to make a slow pass through the
> > source and fix whatever is obvious, adding TODO entries where
> > I see fit to delegate on someone with more insight. Would this
> > help?
>
> totally!
Great! Our sources could definetely use that.
> > Also, if I do this, what
> > is a good example in Turbine of a standard java source file with
> > the proper license, RCS ids, comments, etc., to base my changes on?
>
> start with:
> <http://java.apache.org/turbine/coding_conventions.html>
You should also read JavaDoc documentation. It has all sorts of nifty features.
I suggest that we should use 1.2 Javadoc. It has @throws and {@link} tags
that are very usefull.
I was paying attention to making good javadocs in my Services implementation
(org.apache.turbine.services package), you can take a look on these sources
if you wish.
>
> the license you can just copy from pretty much any file.
I have a question - why are there so many references to JServ in Turbine
license? These two projects aren't this much related. I mean Turbine
doesn't depend of JServ to work.
Rafal
------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Search: <http://www.mail-archive.com/turbine%40list.working-dogs.com/>
Problems?: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
