thanks Robert and Chris for coming back to this, I do agree with Robert those javadoc comments are very important and often just the first thing one dev would look into. Also it'd be nice to have the mentioned check in the build.
Thanks, Tommaso 2012/9/28 Robert Muir <rcm...@gmail.com> > I will do this! > > On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 2:58 PM, Chris Hostetter > <hossman_luc...@fucit.org> wrote: > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-3904 > > > > If someone who knows more then me about the build/smoke checks can attach > > a patch with the neccessary bits to make the build fail when solr > packages > > don't have package level docs, i'll work towards getting the build to > pass > > with that patch. > > > > : Filling in these package.html's to at least have a one sentence > > : description would be a really good start. It lets someone know where > > : to go at the high-level. > > : > > : If I was brand new to solr and wanted to write a java app that uses > > : solrj, i wouldn't have a clue where to start > > : ( > https://builds.apache.org/job/Solr-Artifacts-4.x/javadoc/solr-solrj/index.html > ). > > > > > > -Hoss > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org > >
