Which packages are exported?

[Paul Benedict]

Jon, if you don't mind me arguing your assumption, I think most OSS
projects would want to generate their non-exported packages. There is
little reason you wouldn't want to with these projects. The power is in the
community to understand both the public and internal APIs. I think this
will be the default in the OSS world.

Now, I wouldn't expect non-exported packages for commercial/private
software, but that is a different matter.

Cheers,
Paul

On Mon, May 16, 2016 at 12:15 PM, Jonathan Gibbons <
jonathan.gibbons at oracle.com> wrote:

> Paul,
>
> Generally speaking, you can translate "profiles" in JDK 8 documentation
> into "modules" for JDK 9 documentation.
>
> And, I think you can assume that the default will be for javadoc to only
> generate docs for exported packages, just as the default is to generate
> docs for public/protected types, constructors and members today.  Yes,
> you'll be able to override the default, but when you're generating the API
> documentation for the users/consumers of a module, I would not expect
> non-exported packages to be present.
>
> In addition, there is some amount of discussion of the future role of the
> frames on the left hand side.  Given the availability of the new Search
> feature in JDK 9, the utility of the indices on the left hand side is
> significantly diminished.  For example, if you want to see the packages
> available in a module, you should be able to search for the module name,
> bring up the module summary page, and see which packages have been exported
> (always) and which are not exported (if that info was requested when the
> docs were generated.)
>
> -- Jon
>
>
>
>
> On 05/16/2016 09:48 AM, Paul Benedict wrote:
>
> Jon, I actually think the precedent set is the "All Classes" and "All
> Profiles" toggle link in the overview-frame.html (upper-left frame) [1].
> When "All Profiles" is clicked and then a profile, you get an additional
> option of "All Packages" ... so you could potentially add a fourth just for
> "Exported Packages"
>
> PS: But I don't want to go through so many clicks :-) Having the option
> listed immediately is preferable for my taste.
>
> https://docs.oracle.com/javase/8/docs/api/
>
> Cheers,
> Paul
>
> On Mon, May 16, 2016 at 11:40 AM, Jonathan Gibbons <
> jonathan.gibbons at oracle.com> wrote:
>
>> I guess there's two aspects to this discussion:
>>
>> 1. The packages listed in the summary page for a module.
>>
>> For this, my expectation is that it may be more significant than just a
>> CSS style.
>>
>> For example, one possibility is that the packages could be listed in a
>> table with different "tabs" for exported/non-exported packages, similar to
>> the "table with tabs" used to show different subsets of methods, such as
>> here:
>>     http://download.java.net/java/jdk9/docs/api/java/lang/Object.html
>>
>> 2. Other appearances of a package name.
>>
>> Here, we would have to list the various places where a package name could
>> appear, and decide which if any should be subject to special CSS styling.
>> It has been instructive in the design to look at the relationship between
>> types and packages to find a precedent for the relationship between
>> packages and modules.  For example, I note there is no special styling for
>> package-private types compared to public types.
>>
>> -- Jon
>>
>> On 05/16/2016 09:20 AM, Paul Benedict wrote:
>>
>> Okay. Well, if it hasn't been planned, I definitely would like to make a
>> feature request. Specifically, a CSS style for exported vs. nonexported
>> packages so they can be stylized differently.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Paul
>>
>> On Mon, May 16, 2016 at 11:10 AM, Jonathan Gibbons <
>> jonathan.gibbons at oracle.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 05/16/2016 07:52 AM, Paul Benedict wrote:
>>>
>>>> I was wondering if JavaDoc in JDK 9 provides any visual indicator
>>>> (color, format, textual output, or otherwise) to indicate exported packages
>>>> vs non-exported packages?
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Paul
>>>>
>>>
>>> javadoc is still a work in progress, and somewhat late to the module
>>> game.
>>>
>>> By default, javadoc should only show exported packages for a module, the
>>> same way by default it only shows public and protected constructors and
>>> members for a class, but it should be able to show all packages, just as it
>>> can show all constructors and members.
>>>
>>> -- Jon
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/javadoc-dev/attachments/20160516/98f2587b/attachment-0001.html>