Provide zipped javadoc archive from make
Jiri Vanek
jvanek at redhat.com
Thu Feb 25 17:23:00 UTC 2016
On 02/25/2016 04:31 PM, Jonathan Gibbons wrote:
> Erik,
>
> It sounds like you may describing something different to that which Jiri is asking for.
Well right. Sorry. I read the bug to rashly.
>
> You are describing "bundles of the images, including docs". The docs image contains the output from many separate runs of javadoc, and it sounds like you are considering a make target to generate a single .tar.gz file containing all that javadoc output.
>
> But if I understand Jiri's request correctly, he is asking for each individual collection of output from javadoc to be zipped.
Indeed. I would like to have the javadoc, once generated to be possible to pack it as separate target. But *only* javadoc.
> In other words, we would end up with a dozen or so .zip files from all the various runs of javadoc in the build.
I must be missing something. Dozens? Of varius runs of javadoc?
I thought that javadoc ending at the end in single drectory is one single javadoc for java. If you are referring to javadoc generated by "per module" then one jjoined zip is enough for me.
Thank you for involvement!
J.
>
> -- Jon
>
>
> On 02/25/2016 06:50 AM, Erik Joelsson wrote:
>> Hello Jiri,
>>
>> Adding a build target for creating bundles of all our images, including docs, is currently on my todo here:
>>
>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8136777
>>
>> I believe our intention there is use tar.gz bundles for the most part. I would assume your usecase would require zip? This is certainly something to take into consideration if that's the case.
>>
>> /Erik
>>
>> On 2016-02-25 03:24, Jiri Vanek wrote:
>>> Hello!
>>>
>>> Firs, sorry for spamming three lists but imho it is really touching all of them - it will be change in makefile, and it is new feature for old docs....
>>>
>>>
>>> Currently, when you run make all, javadoc is generated as directory. I do not wont to touch this. However, I would like to add target, which will pack generated javadoc... Lets say correctly to zip archive.
>>>
>>> Having javadoc as directory have its advantages, but having javadoc as archive have another set of advantages. (eg main user of javadoc are IDEs. and all IDEs I know support archived javadocs. All library javadocs distributed over web are distributed as zips, and they are not expected to be unpacked. Many tools crate archved javadocs by default and so on...)
>>>
>>> I'm packaging openjdk for fedora, and next to java-1.X.0-openjdk-javadoc, and I wonted to provide java-1.X.0-openjdk-javadoc-zip so users have an choice to select zipped/unzipped javadoc depending on theirs usage. You may argue that size do not meter, but having four (6,7,8,9) jdks on machine, and so having 4 javadocs - it metres if it is 4x250mb or 4x50mb.
>>>
>>> Also, when I was preparing this simple patch to my packages, I realised - am I compressing all? Am I compressing it correctly and in best way? Is delivering of *JDK's* javadoc as archive even safe?
>>>
>>> So I would say that having this supported in upstream is much better then just pack zip it in distribution packages.
>>>
>>> What do you think?
>>>
>>> If you are interested, I will elaborate patch for jdk9 with wish for jdk8. Change should be simple, and the benefits worthy.
>>>
>>> Thanx!
>>> J.
>>
>
More information about the build-dev
mailing list