DO NOT REPLY [Bug 4157] - javadoc errors

[bu...@apache.org]

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG 
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
<http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4157>.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND 
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4157

javadoc errors

remm@apache.org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED
         Resolution|                            |WONTFIX



------- Additional Comments From remm@apache.org  2001-10-14 13:57 -------
This is a deficiency in Javadoc, which is unable to resolve, or ignore, links 
to the JDK base classes.

Re: DO NOT REPLY [Bug 4157] - javadoc errors

[Dmitri Colebatch <di...@bigpond.net.au>]

I've missed the lead up to this, so excuse me if this has already been
discussed/discarded.

The resolution of this bug (4157) is:

"This is a deficiency in Javadoc, which is unable to resolve, or ignore,
links to the JDK base classes."

which is not strictly true.  At the command line, javadoc has the the
"-linkoffline" flag, which allows tags like @see to link to existing
javadoc.  In the command line version one could use something like:

javadoc -linkoffline http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.3/docs/api . -d docs/
src/Test.java

where in the current directory there is a file called package-list with
one line "java.lang".  Any links to java.lang packages would then go to
sun's site.  Obviously this is not idea, but may be an improvement on not
having them resolved, and it would at least remove the build errors.  

I'm assuming the functionality is also easily acheivable through ant's
javadoc task.  People could then configure the offline link to their own
copy of the javadoc to save bandwidth (o:

I'm not familiar with the build system atm, but imagine this would be easy
to do.  If someone considers it worthwhile I'll happily do it and submit
the patch.

cheers
dim


On Sun, 14 Oct 2001, Jon Stevens wrote:

> on 10/14/01 2:32 PM, "Remy Maucherat" <rm...@home.com> wrote:
> 
> > We could, although they're kinda useful.
> > 
> > Remy
> 
> Don't make them @see then...
> 
> Just put them into the rest of the javadoc.
> 
> -jon
> 
> 

Re: DO NOT REPLY [Bug 4157] - javadoc errors

[Jon Stevens <jo...@latchkey.com>]

on 10/14/01 2:32 PM, "Remy Maucherat" <rm...@home.com> wrote:

> We could, although they're kinda useful.
> 
> Remy

Don't make them @see then...

Just put them into the rest of the javadoc.

-jon

Re: DO NOT REPLY [Bug 4157] - javadoc errors

[Remy Maucherat <rm...@home.com>]

> Remy Maucherat <re...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > This is a deficiency in Javadoc, which is unable to resolve, or ignore,
links
> > to the JDK base classes.
>
> Can't we just remove those @see tags from the sources then?

We could, although they're kinda useful.

Remy

Re: DO NOT REPLY [Bug 4157] - javadoc errors

[Pier Fumagalli <pi...@betaversion.org>]

Remy Maucherat <re...@apache.org> wrote:

> This is a deficiency in Javadoc, which is unable to resolve, or ignore, links
> to the JDK base classes.

Can't we just remove those @see tags from the sources then?

    Pier