You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@lucene.apache.org by "Robert Muir (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org> on 2012/04/21 20:44:35 UTC
[jira] [Created] (LUCENE-4007) many versioned documents
could/should be in javadocs instead.
Robert Muir created LUCENE-4007:
-----------------------------------
Summary: many versioned documents could/should be in javadocs instead.
Key: LUCENE-4007
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4007
Project: Lucene - Java
Issue Type: Task
Reporter: Robert Muir
Looking at our forrested site, and trying to think about how we could move our versioned site
away from it, I think as a first step we should look at what really needs to be there.
I think it easily becomes out of date and we don't have good centralized documentation since
stuff is split between javadocs and forrest.
Couldn't queryparsersyntax.xml simply be in the overview/package for the queryparser?
We could just link to that page from the forrest docs menu, then we could link to the syntax from
other places in the javadocs.
Furthermore, in that case we could link to other queryparser impls documentations (e.g. complexphrase)
so it would probably be more useful.
demo/demo2.xml could just be overview for the demo contrib? currently that one is useless:
https://builds.apache.org/job/Lucene-trunk/javadoc/demo/index.html
scoring.xml could be added to the package documentation of search or similarities or somewhere that
makes more sense? currently its "almost javadocs" already, except harder to validate none of these
links are actually out of date: my best bet is a ton of them already are!
i'll leave fileformats.xml aside for now, but with many different codec implementations its something
to think about for later too.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
[jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-4007) many versioned documents
could/should be in javadocs instead.
Posted by "Uwe Schindler (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4007?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13258917#comment-13258917 ]
Uwe Schindler commented on LUCENE-4007:
---------------------------------------
I would make the current forrest site a plain old html with some links to the javadocs and a plain html fileformat page.
> many versioned documents could/should be in javadocs instead.
> -------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-4007
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4007
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: Task
> Reporter: Robert Muir
>
> Looking at our forrested site, and trying to think about how we could move our versioned site
> away from it, I think as a first step we should look at what really needs to be there.
> I think it easily becomes out of date and we don't have good centralized documentation since
> stuff is split between javadocs and forrest.
> Couldn't queryparsersyntax.xml simply be in the overview/package for the queryparser?
> We could just link to that page from the forrest docs menu, then we could link to the syntax from
> other places in the javadocs.
> Furthermore, in that case we could link to other queryparser impls documentations (e.g. complexphrase)
> so it would probably be more useful.
> demo/demo2.xml could just be overview for the demo contrib? currently that one is useless:
> https://builds.apache.org/job/Lucene-trunk/javadoc/demo/index.html
> scoring.xml could be added to the package documentation of search or similarities or somewhere that
> makes more sense? currently its "almost javadocs" already, except harder to validate none of these
> links are actually out of date: my best bet is a ton of them already are!
> i'll leave fileformats.xml aside for now, but with many different codec implementations its something
> to think about for later too.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
[jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-4007) many versioned documents
could/should be in javadocs instead.
Posted by "Robert Muir (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4007?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13258969#comment-13258969 ]
Robert Muir commented on LUCENE-4007:
-------------------------------------
+1!!!! this is exciting, as i feel actually motivated to improve these docs... the previous
system was too high a barrier to get anything done.
> many versioned documents could/should be in javadocs instead.
> -------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-4007
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4007
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: Task
> Components: general/website
> Affects Versions: 4.0
> Reporter: Robert Muir
> Assignee: Uwe Schindler
> Fix For: 4.0
>
> Attachments: LUCENE-4007.patch, LUCENE-4007.patch, LUCENE-4007.patch
>
>
> Looking at our forrested site, and trying to think about how we could move our versioned site
> away from it, I think as a first step we should look at what really needs to be there.
> I think it easily becomes out of date and we don't have good centralized documentation since
> stuff is split between javadocs and forrest.
> Couldn't queryparsersyntax.xml simply be in the overview/package for the queryparser?
> We could just link to that page from the forrest docs menu, then we could link to the syntax from
> other places in the javadocs.
> Furthermore, in that case we could link to other queryparser impls documentations (e.g. complexphrase)
> so it would probably be more useful.
> demo/demo2.xml could just be overview for the demo contrib? currently that one is useless:
> https://builds.apache.org/job/Lucene-trunk/javadoc/demo/index.html
> scoring.xml could be added to the package documentation of search or similarities or somewhere that
> makes more sense? currently its "almost javadocs" already, except harder to validate none of these
> links are actually out of date: my best bet is a ton of them already are!
> i'll leave fileformats.xml aside for now, but with many different codec implementations its something
> to think about for later too.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
[jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-4007) many versioned documents
could/should be in javadocs instead.
Posted by "Robert Muir (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4007?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13258930#comment-13258930 ]
Robert Muir commented on LUCENE-4007:
-------------------------------------
Oh thats a nice idea: though it would be cool if maybe it didnt generate the *whole* root index file but possibly added to it?
I think it would be nice if we could have a little top-level information besides just the list of modules, that links to certain "key" documents like queryparser syntax, fileformats, facet userguide, demo instructions, analysis overview, scoring (similar to today, but ideally better).
But maybe your xslt could also incorporate this too?
> many versioned documents could/should be in javadocs instead.
> -------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-4007
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4007
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: Task
> Reporter: Robert Muir
>
> Looking at our forrested site, and trying to think about how we could move our versioned site
> away from it, I think as a first step we should look at what really needs to be there.
> I think it easily becomes out of date and we don't have good centralized documentation since
> stuff is split between javadocs and forrest.
> Couldn't queryparsersyntax.xml simply be in the overview/package for the queryparser?
> We could just link to that page from the forrest docs menu, then we could link to the syntax from
> other places in the javadocs.
> Furthermore, in that case we could link to other queryparser impls documentations (e.g. complexphrase)
> so it would probably be more useful.
> demo/demo2.xml could just be overview for the demo contrib? currently that one is useless:
> https://builds.apache.org/job/Lucene-trunk/javadoc/demo/index.html
> scoring.xml could be added to the package documentation of search or similarities or somewhere that
> makes more sense? currently its "almost javadocs" already, except harder to validate none of these
> links are actually out of date: my best bet is a ton of them already are!
> i'll leave fileformats.xml aside for now, but with many different codec implementations its something
> to think about for later too.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
[jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-4007) many versioned documents
could/should be in javadocs instead.
Posted by "Robert Muir (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4007?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13258958#comment-13258958 ]
Robert Muir commented on LUCENE-4007:
-------------------------------------
I just glanced, no testing yet... but if we change javadocs root to be build/docs (instead of build/docs/api), then
we must adjust the variable in solr/common-build to fit:
cd solr, find -name "*-build.xml" | xargs grep "docs/api"
> many versioned documents could/should be in javadocs instead.
> -------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-4007
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4007
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: Task
> Reporter: Robert Muir
> Assignee: Uwe Schindler
> Attachments: LUCENE-4007.patch
>
>
> Looking at our forrested site, and trying to think about how we could move our versioned site
> away from it, I think as a first step we should look at what really needs to be there.
> I think it easily becomes out of date and we don't have good centralized documentation since
> stuff is split between javadocs and forrest.
> Couldn't queryparsersyntax.xml simply be in the overview/package for the queryparser?
> We could just link to that page from the forrest docs menu, then we could link to the syntax from
> other places in the javadocs.
> Furthermore, in that case we could link to other queryparser impls documentations (e.g. complexphrase)
> so it would probably be more useful.
> demo/demo2.xml could just be overview for the demo contrib? currently that one is useless:
> https://builds.apache.org/job/Lucene-trunk/javadoc/demo/index.html
> scoring.xml could be added to the package documentation of search or similarities or somewhere that
> makes more sense? currently its "almost javadocs" already, except harder to validate none of these
> links are actually out of date: my best bet is a ton of them already are!
> i'll leave fileformats.xml aside for now, but with many different codec implementations its something
> to think about for later too.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
[jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-4007) many versioned documents
could/should be in javadocs instead.
Posted by "Robert Muir (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4007?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13258923#comment-13258923 ]
Robert Muir commented on LUCENE-4007:
-------------------------------------
Thats my opinion too Uwe: i think we should nuke the whole forrest and just have
links (maybe with fileformats as a plain html page for now).
I just wanted to get the issue open for discussion, if its controversial, at least
we can take it on a case by case basis for each one of these files and cut down
one tree at a time...
> many versioned documents could/should be in javadocs instead.
> -------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-4007
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4007
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: Task
> Reporter: Robert Muir
>
> Looking at our forrested site, and trying to think about how we could move our versioned site
> away from it, I think as a first step we should look at what really needs to be there.
> I think it easily becomes out of date and we don't have good centralized documentation since
> stuff is split between javadocs and forrest.
> Couldn't queryparsersyntax.xml simply be in the overview/package for the queryparser?
> We could just link to that page from the forrest docs menu, then we could link to the syntax from
> other places in the javadocs.
> Furthermore, in that case we could link to other queryparser impls documentations (e.g. complexphrase)
> so it would probably be more useful.
> demo/demo2.xml could just be overview for the demo contrib? currently that one is useless:
> https://builds.apache.org/job/Lucene-trunk/javadoc/demo/index.html
> scoring.xml could be added to the package documentation of search or similarities or somewhere that
> makes more sense? currently its "almost javadocs" already, except harder to validate none of these
> links are actually out of date: my best bet is a ton of them already are!
> i'll leave fileformats.xml aside for now, but with many different codec implementations its something
> to think about for later too.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
[jira] [Updated] (LUCENE-4007) many versioned documents
could/should be in javadocs instead.
Posted by "Uwe Schindler (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4007?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]
Uwe Schindler updated LUCENE-4007:
----------------------------------
Attachment: LUCENE-4007.patch
Patch without forrest delete.
You have to svn rm: lucene/site/build, lucene/site/src and lucene/site/forrest.properties
> many versioned documents could/should be in javadocs instead.
> -------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-4007
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4007
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: Task
> Components: general/website
> Affects Versions: 4.0
> Reporter: Robert Muir
> Assignee: Uwe Schindler
> Fix For: 4.0
>
> Attachments: LUCENE-4007.patch, LUCENE-4007.patch, LUCENE-4007.patch
>
>
> Looking at our forrested site, and trying to think about how we could move our versioned site
> away from it, I think as a first step we should look at what really needs to be there.
> I think it easily becomes out of date and we don't have good centralized documentation since
> stuff is split between javadocs and forrest.
> Couldn't queryparsersyntax.xml simply be in the overview/package for the queryparser?
> We could just link to that page from the forrest docs menu, then we could link to the syntax from
> other places in the javadocs.
> Furthermore, in that case we could link to other queryparser impls documentations (e.g. complexphrase)
> so it would probably be more useful.
> demo/demo2.xml could just be overview for the demo contrib? currently that one is useless:
> https://builds.apache.org/job/Lucene-trunk/javadoc/demo/index.html
> scoring.xml could be added to the package documentation of search or similarities or somewhere that
> makes more sense? currently its "almost javadocs" already, except harder to validate none of these
> links are actually out of date: my best bet is a ton of them already are!
> i'll leave fileformats.xml aside for now, but with many different codec implementations its something
> to think about for later too.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
[jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-4007) many versioned documents
could/should be in javadocs instead.
Posted by "Robert Muir (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4007?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13258967#comment-13258967 ]
Robert Muir commented on LUCENE-4007:
-------------------------------------
I got it from http://lucene.apache.org/images/lucene_green_300.gif
I think we should nuke the old 'ant docs' task.
instead 'ant package' should depend on 'documentation' instead of 'docs,javadocs,changes2html,...'
then packaging i think is fine.
> many versioned documents could/should be in javadocs instead.
> -------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-4007
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4007
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: Task
> Components: general/website
> Affects Versions: 4.0
> Reporter: Robert Muir
> Assignee: Uwe Schindler
> Fix For: 4.0
>
> Attachments: LUCENE-4007.patch, LUCENE-4007.patch, LUCENE-4007.patch
>
>
> Looking at our forrested site, and trying to think about how we could move our versioned site
> away from it, I think as a first step we should look at what really needs to be there.
> I think it easily becomes out of date and we don't have good centralized documentation since
> stuff is split between javadocs and forrest.
> Couldn't queryparsersyntax.xml simply be in the overview/package for the queryparser?
> We could just link to that page from the forrest docs menu, then we could link to the syntax from
> other places in the javadocs.
> Furthermore, in that case we could link to other queryparser impls documentations (e.g. complexphrase)
> so it would probably be more useful.
> demo/demo2.xml could just be overview for the demo contrib? currently that one is useless:
> https://builds.apache.org/job/Lucene-trunk/javadoc/demo/index.html
> scoring.xml could be added to the package documentation of search or similarities or somewhere that
> makes more sense? currently its "almost javadocs" already, except harder to validate none of these
> links are actually out of date: my best bet is a ton of them already are!
> i'll leave fileformats.xml aside for now, but with many different codec implementations its something
> to think about for later too.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
[jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-4007) many versioned documents
could/should be in javadocs instead.
Posted by "Robert Muir (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4007?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13258913#comment-13258913 ]
Robert Muir commented on LUCENE-4007:
-------------------------------------
Even if we don't decide to do this, we could at least enhance
the forrest site by linking to a few key javadocs pages.
Take a look at the "getting started" page (which is mostly empty)
compared to http://lucene.apache.org/core/3_6_0/api/core/overview-summary.html#overview_description
https://builds.apache.org/job/Lucene-trunk/javadoc/core/org/apache/lucene/analysis/package-summary.html#package_description
is also a good page to introduce the analysis api,
same goes with Similarity and a few other javadocs.
Basically in my opinion, the "versioned site" could just link to some of these pages (easy way
to chainsaw the forrest), but if we don't want to go that route we can at least enhance it to point
to some of the really good docs we already have under javadocs so its not so sparse.
> many versioned documents could/should be in javadocs instead.
> -------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-4007
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4007
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: Task
> Reporter: Robert Muir
>
> Looking at our forrested site, and trying to think about how we could move our versioned site
> away from it, I think as a first step we should look at what really needs to be there.
> I think it easily becomes out of date and we don't have good centralized documentation since
> stuff is split between javadocs and forrest.
> Couldn't queryparsersyntax.xml simply be in the overview/package for the queryparser?
> We could just link to that page from the forrest docs menu, then we could link to the syntax from
> other places in the javadocs.
> Furthermore, in that case we could link to other queryparser impls documentations (e.g. complexphrase)
> so it would probably be more useful.
> demo/demo2.xml could just be overview for the demo contrib? currently that one is useless:
> https://builds.apache.org/job/Lucene-trunk/javadoc/demo/index.html
> scoring.xml could be added to the package documentation of search or similarities or somewhere that
> makes more sense? currently its "almost javadocs" already, except harder to validate none of these
> links are actually out of date: my best bet is a ton of them already are!
> i'll leave fileformats.xml aside for now, but with many different codec implementations its something
> to think about for later too.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
[jira] [Assigned] (LUCENE-4007) many versioned documents
could/should be in javadocs instead.
Posted by "Uwe Schindler (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4007?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]
Uwe Schindler reassigned LUCENE-4007:
-------------------------------------
Assignee: Uwe Schindler
> many versioned documents could/should be in javadocs instead.
> -------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-4007
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4007
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: Task
> Reporter: Robert Muir
> Assignee: Uwe Schindler
>
> Looking at our forrested site, and trying to think about how we could move our versioned site
> away from it, I think as a first step we should look at what really needs to be there.
> I think it easily becomes out of date and we don't have good centralized documentation since
> stuff is split between javadocs and forrest.
> Couldn't queryparsersyntax.xml simply be in the overview/package for the queryparser?
> We could just link to that page from the forrest docs menu, then we could link to the syntax from
> other places in the javadocs.
> Furthermore, in that case we could link to other queryparser impls documentations (e.g. complexphrase)
> so it would probably be more useful.
> demo/demo2.xml could just be overview for the demo contrib? currently that one is useless:
> https://builds.apache.org/job/Lucene-trunk/javadoc/demo/index.html
> scoring.xml could be added to the package documentation of search or similarities or somewhere that
> makes more sense? currently its "almost javadocs" already, except harder to validate none of these
> links are actually out of date: my best bet is a ton of them already are!
> i'll leave fileformats.xml aside for now, but with many different codec implementations its something
> to think about for later too.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
[jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-4007) many versioned documents
could/should be in javadocs instead.
Posted by "Robert Muir (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4007?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13258961#comment-13258961 ]
Robert Muir commented on LUCENE-4007:
-------------------------------------
OK two more:
define-lucene-javadoc-url-SNAPSHOT
and
define-lucene-javddoc-url-release
These would be the url links (if we nuke api, then the website will reflect it).
So if we fix these 3 things then solr will work.
> many versioned documents could/should be in javadocs instead.
> -------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-4007
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4007
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: Task
> Reporter: Robert Muir
> Assignee: Uwe Schindler
> Attachments: LUCENE-4007.patch
>
>
> Looking at our forrested site, and trying to think about how we could move our versioned site
> away from it, I think as a first step we should look at what really needs to be there.
> I think it easily becomes out of date and we don't have good centralized documentation since
> stuff is split between javadocs and forrest.
> Couldn't queryparsersyntax.xml simply be in the overview/package for the queryparser?
> We could just link to that page from the forrest docs menu, then we could link to the syntax from
> other places in the javadocs.
> Furthermore, in that case we could link to other queryparser impls documentations (e.g. complexphrase)
> so it would probably be more useful.
> demo/demo2.xml could just be overview for the demo contrib? currently that one is useless:
> https://builds.apache.org/job/Lucene-trunk/javadoc/demo/index.html
> scoring.xml could be added to the package documentation of search or similarities or somewhere that
> makes more sense? currently its "almost javadocs" already, except harder to validate none of these
> links are actually out of date: my best bet is a ton of them already are!
> i'll leave fileformats.xml aside for now, but with many different codec implementations its something
> to think about for later too.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
[jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-4007) many versioned documents
could/should be in javadocs instead.
Posted by "Uwe Schindler (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4007?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13258915#comment-13258915 ]
Uwe Schindler commented on LUCENE-4007:
---------------------------------------
Nice idea. I would put the syntax inside the java package overview itsself and not into the module overview. As we have multiple parsers, we should separate their syntaxes.
> many versioned documents could/should be in javadocs instead.
> -------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-4007
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4007
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: Task
> Reporter: Robert Muir
>
> Looking at our forrested site, and trying to think about how we could move our versioned site
> away from it, I think as a first step we should look at what really needs to be there.
> I think it easily becomes out of date and we don't have good centralized documentation since
> stuff is split between javadocs and forrest.
> Couldn't queryparsersyntax.xml simply be in the overview/package for the queryparser?
> We could just link to that page from the forrest docs menu, then we could link to the syntax from
> other places in the javadocs.
> Furthermore, in that case we could link to other queryparser impls documentations (e.g. complexphrase)
> so it would probably be more useful.
> demo/demo2.xml could just be overview for the demo contrib? currently that one is useless:
> https://builds.apache.org/job/Lucene-trunk/javadoc/demo/index.html
> scoring.xml could be added to the package documentation of search or similarities or somewhere that
> makes more sense? currently its "almost javadocs" already, except harder to validate none of these
> links are actually out of date: my best bet is a ton of them already are!
> i'll leave fileformats.xml aside for now, but with many different codec implementations its something
> to think about for later too.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
[jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-4007) many versioned documents
could/should be in javadocs instead.
Posted by "Uwe Schindler (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4007?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13258968#comment-13258968 ]
Uwe Schindler commented on LUCENE-4007:
---------------------------------------
Fixed locally. I will commit that asap, so we can proceed with nuking the scoring.html and fix all remaining documentation files.
> many versioned documents could/should be in javadocs instead.
> -------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-4007
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4007
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: Task
> Components: general/website
> Affects Versions: 4.0
> Reporter: Robert Muir
> Assignee: Uwe Schindler
> Fix For: 4.0
>
> Attachments: LUCENE-4007.patch, LUCENE-4007.patch, LUCENE-4007.patch
>
>
> Looking at our forrested site, and trying to think about how we could move our versioned site
> away from it, I think as a first step we should look at what really needs to be there.
> I think it easily becomes out of date and we don't have good centralized documentation since
> stuff is split between javadocs and forrest.
> Couldn't queryparsersyntax.xml simply be in the overview/package for the queryparser?
> We could just link to that page from the forrest docs menu, then we could link to the syntax from
> other places in the javadocs.
> Furthermore, in that case we could link to other queryparser impls documentations (e.g. complexphrase)
> so it would probably be more useful.
> demo/demo2.xml could just be overview for the demo contrib? currently that one is useless:
> https://builds.apache.org/job/Lucene-trunk/javadoc/demo/index.html
> scoring.xml could be added to the package documentation of search or similarities or somewhere that
> makes more sense? currently its "almost javadocs" already, except harder to validate none of these
> links are actually out of date: my best bet is a ton of them already are!
> i'll leave fileformats.xml aside for now, but with many different codec implementations its something
> to think about for later too.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
[jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-4007) many versioned documents
could/should be in javadocs instead.
Posted by "Uwe Schindler (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4007?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13258966#comment-13258966 ]
Uwe Schindler commented on LUCENE-4007:
---------------------------------------
Ah and also place in lucene/site/html the file lucene_green_300.gif (its somewhere placed under the forrest source or on homepage)
> many versioned documents could/should be in javadocs instead.
> -------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-4007
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4007
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: Task
> Components: general/website
> Affects Versions: 4.0
> Reporter: Robert Muir
> Assignee: Uwe Schindler
> Fix For: 4.0
>
> Attachments: LUCENE-4007.patch, LUCENE-4007.patch, LUCENE-4007.patch
>
>
> Looking at our forrested site, and trying to think about how we could move our versioned site
> away from it, I think as a first step we should look at what really needs to be there.
> I think it easily becomes out of date and we don't have good centralized documentation since
> stuff is split between javadocs and forrest.
> Couldn't queryparsersyntax.xml simply be in the overview/package for the queryparser?
> We could just link to that page from the forrest docs menu, then we could link to the syntax from
> other places in the javadocs.
> Furthermore, in that case we could link to other queryparser impls documentations (e.g. complexphrase)
> so it would probably be more useful.
> demo/demo2.xml could just be overview for the demo contrib? currently that one is useless:
> https://builds.apache.org/job/Lucene-trunk/javadoc/demo/index.html
> scoring.xml could be added to the package documentation of search or similarities or somewhere that
> makes more sense? currently its "almost javadocs" already, except harder to validate none of these
> links are actually out of date: my best bet is a ton of them already are!
> i'll leave fileformats.xml aside for now, but with many different codec implementations its something
> to think about for later too.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
[jira] [Updated] (LUCENE-4007) many versioned documents
could/should be in javadocs instead.
Posted by "Uwe Schindler (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4007?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]
Uwe Schindler updated LUCENE-4007:
----------------------------------
Attachment: LUCENE-4007.patch
New patch against rev. 1328746
> many versioned documents could/should be in javadocs instead.
> -------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-4007
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4007
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: Task
> Reporter: Robert Muir
> Assignee: Uwe Schindler
> Attachments: LUCENE-4007.patch, LUCENE-4007.patch
>
>
> Looking at our forrested site, and trying to think about how we could move our versioned site
> away from it, I think as a first step we should look at what really needs to be there.
> I think it easily becomes out of date and we don't have good centralized documentation since
> stuff is split between javadocs and forrest.
> Couldn't queryparsersyntax.xml simply be in the overview/package for the queryparser?
> We could just link to that page from the forrest docs menu, then we could link to the syntax from
> other places in the javadocs.
> Furthermore, in that case we could link to other queryparser impls documentations (e.g. complexphrase)
> so it would probably be more useful.
> demo/demo2.xml could just be overview for the demo contrib? currently that one is useless:
> https://builds.apache.org/job/Lucene-trunk/javadoc/demo/index.html
> scoring.xml could be added to the package documentation of search or similarities or somewhere that
> makes more sense? currently its "almost javadocs" already, except harder to validate none of these
> links are actually out of date: my best bet is a ton of them already are!
> i'll leave fileformats.xml aside for now, but with many different codec implementations its something
> to think about for later too.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
[jira] [Updated] (LUCENE-4007) many versioned documents
could/should be in javadocs instead.
Posted by "Uwe Schindler (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4007?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]
Uwe Schindler updated LUCENE-4007:
----------------------------------
Component/s: general/website
Affects Version/s: 4.0
Fix Version/s: 4.0
> many versioned documents could/should be in javadocs instead.
> -------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-4007
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4007
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: Task
> Components: general/website
> Affects Versions: 4.0
> Reporter: Robert Muir
> Assignee: Uwe Schindler
> Fix For: 4.0
>
> Attachments: LUCENE-4007.patch, LUCENE-4007.patch
>
>
> Looking at our forrested site, and trying to think about how we could move our versioned site
> away from it, I think as a first step we should look at what really needs to be there.
> I think it easily becomes out of date and we don't have good centralized documentation since
> stuff is split between javadocs and forrest.
> Couldn't queryparsersyntax.xml simply be in the overview/package for the queryparser?
> We could just link to that page from the forrest docs menu, then we could link to the syntax from
> other places in the javadocs.
> Furthermore, in that case we could link to other queryparser impls documentations (e.g. complexphrase)
> so it would probably be more useful.
> demo/demo2.xml could just be overview for the demo contrib? currently that one is useless:
> https://builds.apache.org/job/Lucene-trunk/javadoc/demo/index.html
> scoring.xml could be added to the package documentation of search or similarities or somewhere that
> makes more sense? currently its "almost javadocs" already, except harder to validate none of these
> links are actually out of date: my best bet is a ton of them already are!
> i'll leave fileformats.xml aside for now, but with many different codec implementations its something
> to think about for later too.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
[jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-4007) many versioned documents
could/should be in javadocs instead.
Posted by "Robert Muir (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4007?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13258959#comment-13258959 ]
Robert Muir commented on LUCENE-4007:
-------------------------------------
I think its just that one 'lucenedocs' property.
> many versioned documents could/should be in javadocs instead.
> -------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-4007
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4007
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: Task
> Reporter: Robert Muir
> Assignee: Uwe Schindler
> Attachments: LUCENE-4007.patch
>
>
> Looking at our forrested site, and trying to think about how we could move our versioned site
> away from it, I think as a first step we should look at what really needs to be there.
> I think it easily becomes out of date and we don't have good centralized documentation since
> stuff is split between javadocs and forrest.
> Couldn't queryparsersyntax.xml simply be in the overview/package for the queryparser?
> We could just link to that page from the forrest docs menu, then we could link to the syntax from
> other places in the javadocs.
> Furthermore, in that case we could link to other queryparser impls documentations (e.g. complexphrase)
> so it would probably be more useful.
> demo/demo2.xml could just be overview for the demo contrib? currently that one is useless:
> https://builds.apache.org/job/Lucene-trunk/javadoc/demo/index.html
> scoring.xml could be added to the package documentation of search or similarities or somewhere that
> makes more sense? currently its "almost javadocs" already, except harder to validate none of these
> links are actually out of date: my best bet is a ton of them already are!
> i'll leave fileformats.xml aside for now, but with many different codec implementations its something
> to think about for later too.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
[jira] [Resolved] (LUCENE-4007) many versioned documents
could/should be in javadocs instead.
Posted by "Uwe Schindler (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4007?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]
Uwe Schindler resolved LUCENE-4007.
-----------------------------------
Resolution: Fixed
Committed Revision: 1328748
> many versioned documents could/should be in javadocs instead.
> -------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-4007
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4007
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: Task
> Components: general/website
> Affects Versions: 4.0
> Reporter: Robert Muir
> Assignee: Uwe Schindler
> Fix For: 4.0
>
> Attachments: LUCENE-4007.patch, LUCENE-4007.patch, LUCENE-4007.patch
>
>
> Looking at our forrested site, and trying to think about how we could move our versioned site
> away from it, I think as a first step we should look at what really needs to be there.
> I think it easily becomes out of date and we don't have good centralized documentation since
> stuff is split between javadocs and forrest.
> Couldn't queryparsersyntax.xml simply be in the overview/package for the queryparser?
> We could just link to that page from the forrest docs menu, then we could link to the syntax from
> other places in the javadocs.
> Furthermore, in that case we could link to other queryparser impls documentations (e.g. complexphrase)
> so it would probably be more useful.
> demo/demo2.xml could just be overview for the demo contrib? currently that one is useless:
> https://builds.apache.org/job/Lucene-trunk/javadoc/demo/index.html
> scoring.xml could be added to the package documentation of search or similarities or somewhere that
> makes more sense? currently its "almost javadocs" already, except harder to validate none of these
> links are actually out of date: my best bet is a ton of them already are!
> i'll leave fileformats.xml aside for now, but with many different codec implementations its something
> to think about for later too.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
[jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-4007) many versioned documents
could/should be in javadocs instead.
Posted by "Uwe Schindler (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4007?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13258925#comment-13258925 ]
Uwe Schindler commented on LUCENE-4007:
---------------------------------------
Another idea, we should nuke the whole versioned docs. Like for the facet module, additional Html can be placed in source tree (folder doc-files or like that, take facet as example) and linked from overview page. The ant-generated index html could be improved to be the root index file. I am working on that (I'll make it a XSLT at the.moment...).
This way, the whole site docs are generaded by the javadocs task.
> many versioned documents could/should be in javadocs instead.
> -------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-4007
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4007
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: Task
> Reporter: Robert Muir
>
> Looking at our forrested site, and trying to think about how we could move our versioned site
> away from it, I think as a first step we should look at what really needs to be there.
> I think it easily becomes out of date and we don't have good centralized documentation since
> stuff is split between javadocs and forrest.
> Couldn't queryparsersyntax.xml simply be in the overview/package for the queryparser?
> We could just link to that page from the forrest docs menu, then we could link to the syntax from
> other places in the javadocs.
> Furthermore, in that case we could link to other queryparser impls documentations (e.g. complexphrase)
> so it would probably be more useful.
> demo/demo2.xml could just be overview for the demo contrib? currently that one is useless:
> https://builds.apache.org/job/Lucene-trunk/javadoc/demo/index.html
> scoring.xml could be added to the package documentation of search or similarities or somewhere that
> makes more sense? currently its "almost javadocs" already, except harder to validate none of these
> links are actually out of date: my best bet is a ton of them already are!
> i'll leave fileformats.xml aside for now, but with many different codec implementations its something
> to think about for later too.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
[jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-4007) many versioned documents
could/should be in javadocs instead.
Posted by "Uwe Schindler (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4007?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13258962#comment-13258962 ]
Uwe Schindler commented on LUCENE-4007:
---------------------------------------
Fixed, too
> many versioned documents could/should be in javadocs instead.
> -------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-4007
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4007
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: Task
> Reporter: Robert Muir
> Assignee: Uwe Schindler
> Attachments: LUCENE-4007.patch
>
>
> Looking at our forrested site, and trying to think about how we could move our versioned site
> away from it, I think as a first step we should look at what really needs to be there.
> I think it easily becomes out of date and we don't have good centralized documentation since
> stuff is split between javadocs and forrest.
> Couldn't queryparsersyntax.xml simply be in the overview/package for the queryparser?
> We could just link to that page from the forrest docs menu, then we could link to the syntax from
> other places in the javadocs.
> Furthermore, in that case we could link to other queryparser impls documentations (e.g. complexphrase)
> so it would probably be more useful.
> demo/demo2.xml could just be overview for the demo contrib? currently that one is useless:
> https://builds.apache.org/job/Lucene-trunk/javadoc/demo/index.html
> scoring.xml could be added to the package documentation of search or similarities or somewhere that
> makes more sense? currently its "almost javadocs" already, except harder to validate none of these
> links are actually out of date: my best bet is a ton of them already are!
> i'll leave fileformats.xml aside for now, but with many different codec implementations its something
> to think about for later too.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
[jira] [Updated] (LUCENE-4007) many versioned documents
could/should be in javadocs instead.
Posted by "Uwe Schindler (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4007?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]
Uwe Schindler updated LUCENE-4007:
----------------------------------
Attachment: LUCENE-4007.patch
Patch applying the chainsaw to the forrest:
- The documentation root is now build/docs/index.html, which is created by XSL transformation
- Query Parser syntax was moved to the javadocs of o.a.l.queryparser.classic overview.html
- Scoring howto is still outside javadocs, but de-forrested by the carpenter.
- Same for demo1/demo2 howto pages
- The documentation including javadocs is created by "ant documentation"
- Javadocs are now directly per module under docs/, no api folder inbetween.
> many versioned documents could/should be in javadocs instead.
> -------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-4007
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4007
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: Task
> Reporter: Robert Muir
> Assignee: Uwe Schindler
> Attachments: LUCENE-4007.patch
>
>
> Looking at our forrested site, and trying to think about how we could move our versioned site
> away from it, I think as a first step we should look at what really needs to be there.
> I think it easily becomes out of date and we don't have good centralized documentation since
> stuff is split between javadocs and forrest.
> Couldn't queryparsersyntax.xml simply be in the overview/package for the queryparser?
> We could just link to that page from the forrest docs menu, then we could link to the syntax from
> other places in the javadocs.
> Furthermore, in that case we could link to other queryparser impls documentations (e.g. complexphrase)
> so it would probably be more useful.
> demo/demo2.xml could just be overview for the demo contrib? currently that one is useless:
> https://builds.apache.org/job/Lucene-trunk/javadoc/demo/index.html
> scoring.xml could be added to the package documentation of search or similarities or somewhere that
> makes more sense? currently its "almost javadocs" already, except harder to validate none of these
> links are actually out of date: my best bet is a ton of them already are!
> i'll leave fileformats.xml aside for now, but with many different codec implementations its something
> to think about for later too.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
[jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-4007) many versioned documents
could/should be in javadocs instead.
Posted by "Uwe Schindler (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4007?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13258960#comment-13258960 ]
Uwe Schindler commented on LUCENE-4007:
---------------------------------------
OK, fixed locally.
> many versioned documents could/should be in javadocs instead.
> -------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-4007
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4007
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: Task
> Reporter: Robert Muir
> Assignee: Uwe Schindler
> Attachments: LUCENE-4007.patch
>
>
> Looking at our forrested site, and trying to think about how we could move our versioned site
> away from it, I think as a first step we should look at what really needs to be there.
> I think it easily becomes out of date and we don't have good centralized documentation since
> stuff is split between javadocs and forrest.
> Couldn't queryparsersyntax.xml simply be in the overview/package for the queryparser?
> We could just link to that page from the forrest docs menu, then we could link to the syntax from
> other places in the javadocs.
> Furthermore, in that case we could link to other queryparser impls documentations (e.g. complexphrase)
> so it would probably be more useful.
> demo/demo2.xml could just be overview for the demo contrib? currently that one is useless:
> https://builds.apache.org/job/Lucene-trunk/javadoc/demo/index.html
> scoring.xml could be added to the package documentation of search or similarities or somewhere that
> makes more sense? currently its "almost javadocs" already, except harder to validate none of these
> links are actually out of date: my best bet is a ton of them already are!
> i'll leave fileformats.xml aside for now, but with many different codec implementations its something
> to think about for later too.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
[jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-4007) many versioned documents
could/should be in javadocs instead.
Posted by "Uwe Schindler (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4007?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13258933#comment-13258933 ]
Uwe Schindler commented on LUCENE-4007:
---------------------------------------
That was the idea, the XSLT would contain the whole html, in addition to the root link list. I can take that issue and prepare patch.
> many versioned documents could/should be in javadocs instead.
> -------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-4007
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4007
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: Task
> Reporter: Robert Muir
>
> Looking at our forrested site, and trying to think about how we could move our versioned site
> away from it, I think as a first step we should look at what really needs to be there.
> I think it easily becomes out of date and we don't have good centralized documentation since
> stuff is split between javadocs and forrest.
> Couldn't queryparsersyntax.xml simply be in the overview/package for the queryparser?
> We could just link to that page from the forrest docs menu, then we could link to the syntax from
> other places in the javadocs.
> Furthermore, in that case we could link to other queryparser impls documentations (e.g. complexphrase)
> so it would probably be more useful.
> demo/demo2.xml could just be overview for the demo contrib? currently that one is useless:
> https://builds.apache.org/job/Lucene-trunk/javadoc/demo/index.html
> scoring.xml could be added to the package documentation of search or similarities or somewhere that
> makes more sense? currently its "almost javadocs" already, except harder to validate none of these
> links are actually out of date: my best bet is a ton of them already are!
> i'll leave fileformats.xml aside for now, but with many different codec implementations its something
> to think about for later too.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org