Jerome Dochez wrote:
>
> On Oct 24, 2007, at 7:25 AM, Eduardo Pelegri-Llopart wrote:
>
>> One of the things I really liked about Emacs is that the
>> documentation was/is an integral part of the binary. You could always
>> get at it via M-x info et al. IIRC, it is still possible to strip out
>> the documentation if you really wanted, but most of the time you just
>> have it. Since the documentation came from the info strings in the
>> code, there was no possibility of having version mismatches. It also
>> drove code completion, etc.
>>
>> What are our plans for documentation for GFv3?
>>
> mostly it will be in the code, using annotations with associated
> ResourceBundles. we should also use more widely javadocs, I am also a
> strong believer of co-locating the code and documentation as it really
> help to keep things in sync.
>
> as for the exact version numbers of each technologies, I think Sahoo
> is looking for this
>
> http://wiki.glassfish.java.net/Wiki.jsp?page=pe-10.0-SNAPSHOT
>
> but for v2, and we don't have it AFAIK
>
> jerome
>
Yes, I was looking for similar information for v2 and v1ur1. I should
also mention that the v3 information seems too much for end users to
consume. Should it be separated into at least two categories, viz: 1)
only public APIs expected to be used by users, 2) SPIs for GlassFish
module developers?
We should also improve the documentation page [1].
1) The javadocs link on the left side panel points to GlassFish v1.
Where does v2 & v1ur1 users find the appropriate javadocs? One should be
able to locate documentation including javadocs for each release.
2) I see only draft versions of documents in [1]. Are they really draft
versions? When will we post the final versions for V2?
3) There is no documentation bundle available to download in the
download page [2].
Thanks,
Sahoo
[1]
https://glassfish.dev.java.net/javaee5/docs/DocsIndex.html
[2]
https://glassfish.dev.java.net/public/downloadsindex.html