5 Replies Latest reply on Feb 26, 2010 2:32 PM by timfox

    Java Doc Missing

    jtyrrell

      I see references to FileConfigurationImpl and other classes in the http://community.jboss.org/thread/146342?decorator=print&displayFullThread=true and in the user manual here: http://www.jboss.org/file-access/default/members/jbossmessaging/freezone/docs/usermanual-2.0.0.beta1/html/embedding-jbm.html

       

      When I look here:

      http://hornetq.sourceforge.net/docs/hornetq-2.0.0.GA/api/

       

      They also are not in the javadoc that was shipped with the GA.

       

      I do not see them listed, is this an oversight or am I missing something?

       

      I also do not see this classes listed/available in any of the shipped jars?


      When I breakdown the jar -tf hornetq-core.jar file I do find this class, org/hornetq/core/config/impl/FileConfiguration.class, but again I do not see this in the javadocs, is this the same thing and and an oversight in the docs.

        • 1. Re: Java Doc Missing
          timfox

          That's deliberate.

           

          We only javadoc classes that are part of the public API.

          • 2. Re: Java Doc Missing
            jtyrrell
            So i'll bite, then why is it still in the shipping documents in the bundle, why do the examples reference java code that is in the "private" API and not easily documented.  I admit I have not been around the discussion, so I am not sure if this makes sense or not, but I do not understand the reasons for a public vs private. 
            • 3. Re: Java Doc Missing
              timfox

              This is discussed here: https://jira.jboss.org/jira/browse/TAG-29

               

              We may consider moving out the embedded stuff into a public API sometime in the future.

              • 4. Re: Java Doc Missing
                jtyrrell
                I guess my comment will be then as this gets productized, we need to clearly mark what parts of the API are/are not going to be supported as part of the EAP subscription I guess.  Thanks for the insight.
                • 5. Re: Java Doc Missing
                  timfox

                  jtyrrell wrote:

                   

                  I guess my comment will be then as this gets productized, we need to clearly mark what parts of the API are/are not going to be supported as part of the EAP subscription I guess.  Thanks for the insight.

                  Right, that's the idea behind the public/private split.

                   

                  Anything in the public api is supportable and we need to make compatibility guarantees for in the EAP.

                   

                  Anything else we can change when we want.