Java headless bugs

[Jerry James]

On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 2:00 AM, Stanislav Ochotnicky <
sochotnicky at redhat.com> wrote:

> Actually we are strongly considering getting rid of javadocs
> completely[1] mostly due to Java 8 problems. We might be able to leave
> them be perhaps, but it's just a lot of work with uncertain
> benefits/users and it's slowing down builds considerably. Email on
> java-devel explains this in more detail.
>
> [1]
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/java-devel/2014-February/005133.html


Speaking only for myself, I find the local javadoc packages to be very
valuable resources when I am developing Java code.  I only use a small
subset of all the Java packages shipped by Fedora, of course, but I am
willing to help get the javadocs in shape for Java 8.  Do you have a list
of problem packages for Java 8?

This does nothing for the speed of building or disk space issues, of
course, but that's the price one pays for developer documentation.

If you do go with optional javadoc packages, can we consider Ville's
suggestion for those javadoc packages that *are* produced?  More
cross-linking of javadocs would be helpful for me as a developer, too.

Perhaps I'm the only developer who feels this way.
-- 
Jerry James
http://www.jamezone.org/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20140226/de1e5895/attachment.html>