Hi,
So, apparently, our JavaDoc CSS is a bit outdated as we now have a "Skip
navigation links" link at the top of our doc that should be hidden by
default.
Frankly, I see very little value in maintaining our own JavaDoc CSS. It
requires work (see above and the future JDK 9 upgrade - Marko did a f
In general I agree. This was a big hassle when Oracle re-did the JavaDoc
generation a few releases ago (was it 6?).
IMO though its still a nice touch to "skin" the coloring in the nav bars,
main header, footer etc. I have not looked into how much work just those
limited changes would be however.
Sounds good to me.
On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 3:11 PM, Guillaume Smet
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> So, apparently, our JavaDoc CSS is a bit outdated as we now have a "Skip
> navigation links" link at the top of our doc that should be hidden by
> default.
>
> Frankly, I see very little value in maintaining our
On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 6:02 PM, Steve Ebersole wrote:
> IMO though its still a nice touch to "skin" the coloring in the nav bars,
> main header, footer etc. I have not looked into how much work just those
> limited changes would be however. If that is sufficiently difficult to
> maintain, then
Now that I've looked more, I agree. That standard one is much closer to
the feel of the new website/blogs
On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 12:35 PM Davide D'Alto
wrote:
> Sounds good to me.
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 3:11 PM, Guillaume Smet
> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > So, apparently, our JavaDoc CSS is
I agree, unless someone wats to step up to make it actually nice
looking and will keep them nice looking for a while, be a bit
proactive regarding JDK versions, consistent across projects, etc..
Since we don't have the bandwith for that the default look is compelling.
Java 9 makes the javadoc muc
+1 for going with the standard.
2017-11-30 18:11 GMT+01:00 Guillaume Smet :
> On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 6:02 PM, Steve Ebersole
> wrote:
>
> > IMO though its still a nice touch to "skin" the coloring in the nav bars,
> > main header, footer etc. I have not looked into how much work just those
> >
OK cool. Nice we have an agreement.
Will do on the NoORM projects.
--
Guillaume
On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 8:35 PM, Gunnar Morling
wrote:
> +1 for going with the standard.
>
> 2017-11-30 18:11 GMT+01:00 Guillaume Smet :
>
>> On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 6:02 PM, Steve Ebersole
>> wrote:
>>
>> > IMO
