Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Website only hosts public API javadocs #448

Open
ddanielr opened this issue Nov 6, 2024 · 1 comment
Open

Website only hosts public API javadocs #448

ddanielr opened this issue Nov 6, 2024 · 1 comment

Comments

@ddanielr
Copy link
Contributor

ddanielr commented Nov 6, 2024

The accumulo website only hosts the public API javadocs.
This is problematic as the website link does not have verbiage that describes these javadocs are only scoped to the public API classes.

Looking at javadoc.io, there is a clear difference between the package index available between the 2.1.3 versions of accumulo.

https://accumulo.apache.org/docs/2.x/apidocs/allpackages-index.html
https://www.javadoc.io/doc/org.apache.accumulo/accumulo-core/2.1.3/allpackages-index.html

@ctubbsii
Copy link
Member

I'm not sure what the problem is that you're reporting here. Yes, the docs are a subset of all the Java code. That is intentional, and fits our general theme of trying to document what we think is useful/relevant for users to know. I don't think there is any implication that the javadocs are comprehensive.

The javadoc jars published to Maven Central, however, are comprehensive, and I believe that's what powers javadoc.io. But, what a third party chooses to publish has no bearing on what we choose to publish. I'm not sure there's anything for us to fix here.

Also, for what it's worth, the links on the downloads page refers to these as "Java API", which I think aligns nicely with the subset we're choosing to publish. So, I don't think there's anything to do for this issue.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants