Skip to content

UNOMI-906: Fix javadoc tags and new lines.#728

Merged
sergehuber merged 2 commits intoapache:masterfrom
jayblanc:UNOMI-906
Sep 2, 2025
Merged

UNOMI-906: Fix javadoc tags and new lines.#728
sergehuber merged 2 commits intoapache:masterfrom
jayblanc:UNOMI-906

Conversation

@jayblanc
Copy link
Contributor

@jayblanc jayblanc commented Sep 2, 2025

This PR fixes some issues that prevent javadoc generation.

* This class encapsulates all metadata associated with a compiled Groovy script,
* including content hash for efficient change detection and the compiled class
* for direct execution without recompilation.
* </p>
Copy link
Contributor

@Fgerthoffert Fgerthoffert Sep 2, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Why are you removing </p> while keeping <p> ?

Aren't they never closed ?

Copy link
Contributor Author

@jayblanc jayblanc Sep 2, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

No, according to Javadoc Doc : https://www.oracle.com/technical-resources/articles/java/javadoc-tool.html#format there is no closing tag for paragraphs:

If you have more than one paragraph in the doc comment, separate the paragraphs with a <p> paragraph tag, as shown.

@Fgerthoffert Fgerthoffert self-requested a review September 2, 2025 08:25
@sergehuber
Copy link
Contributor

Actually I have fixed that in the 2.7.x release branch and wanted to backport it to the main branch after completing the release. I solved this differently by closing the

tag before the

    because the list tags are not allowed inside the

    tags. But it seems to work fine otherwise when keeping the

    tag. You can find my commit here, you will notice it requires a lot less changes :
    d06b31b

@jayblanc
Copy link
Contributor Author

jayblanc commented Sep 2, 2025

Effectively, it fails because of succession of < /ul > and < /p > anyway, closing paragraph tag is useless and not allowed so removing all occurrences may be a better option ?

@sergehuber sergehuber merged commit 4c18283 into apache:master Sep 2, 2025
5 checks passed
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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants