Thanks Marshall! This was the only inconsistency I noticed. Himanshu
On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 3:55 PM, Marshall Schor <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > The Javadocs we distribute are a subset of the classes, as you have > discovered. > There is an attempt to not distribute Javadocs for classes which are > "internal", > or "implementations", as opposed to APIs, as these are more likely to > change > from release to release. > > At one point someone started some work to have a more complete Javadoc > generated, > for "developers" to use, but that wasn't completed. > > Is this the only lack of conformity that you see, or are there other kinds > of > issues? > > Thanks. -Marshall Schor > > On 10/12/2012 2:35 PM, Himanshu Gahlot wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I was exploring the classes in the newly released 2.4.0 version of UIMA > > through the online Javadocs ( > > http://uima.apache.org/d/uimaj-2.4.0/apidocs/index.html) but found that > > they do not conform to the actual classes in the API. I checked this by > > downloading both source and binary files for 2.4.0 release from here ( > > http://uima.apache.org/downloads.cgi#Latest%20Official%20Releases) and > > compared the actual class hierarchy in those with the online Javadocs. > The > > Javadocs packaged in the download are also not conforming to the actual > API > > structure. For instance, the package org.apache.uima.cas.impl shows only > 5 > > classes in the javadocs ( > > http://uima.apache.org/d/uimaj-2.4.0/apidocs/index.html) but in the > actual > > jar/source it has more than 50 classes. Is this issue known already or > am I > > missing something on my end? > > > > Himanshu > > > >
