Yes, good question.  And I have concerns about how existing, or submitted jdoc, would be handled.   Can you mix the two approaches?   I agree with ppalaga, perhaps not worth the change.

On 4/29/2015 5:26 AM, Peter Palaga wrote:
On 2015-04-28 13:50, Lukas Krejci wrote:

What about IDE support for Asciidoc docs? Me, I like being able to click on
links in javadoc popups.

+1 for the question about the IDE support. Jared, do you know how does 
it work in Eclipse & Co?

Regardless of the above, I do not see the need to introduce asciidoclet. 
There is very little plain HTML in typical good JavaDoc and this small 
amount is not worth the trouble, IMO.

-- P


On Monday, April 27, 2015 20:38:47 Jared MORGAN wrote:

I'm coming late to the party here, so my apologies for that.

I understand that docs for Hawkular will be done in Asciidoc (great move
IMHO).

Why not extend that to Javadocs: https://github.com/asciidoctor/asciidoclet

Compatible with Maven. No need to try and kludge HTML to make tables work.
Easy to read directly in code as well as looking pretty when compiled.

Thoughts?

J

----- Original Message -----


Hi Jay, there is just a couple of them in Bus - see the attached file.
-- P

If everyone writes as good as javadocs as I do, I'm all for the javadoc
checker :-D
_______________________________________________
hawkular-dev mailing list
hawkular-dev@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hawkular-dev

_______________________________________________
hawkular-dev mailing list
hawkular-dev@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hawkular-dev

_______________________________________________
hawkular-dev mailing list
hawkular-dev@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hawkular-dev


_______________________________________________
hawkular-dev mailing list
hawkular-dev@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hawkular-dev