Emmanuel Lecharny ha scritto:

Sure. If Trustin simply did what you asked with your veto we would have a lot of @see or copy&paste comments and it would be a lot worse. I personally think that @inheritdoc is clutter when you don't need to add anything to the doc, but anyway this would have been much easier if it didn't start with a veto ;-)

IMHO a similar scenario is better solved with the committers involvement and not with a veto from a single PMC member. the community idea about the style should be collected and then followed. There could be people out there with deep knowledge of javadocs and why a given style is good or bad and it is better to discuss new solutions instead of closing in your opinions with an early veto.

In my environment the javadoc generation for a class with no javadocs implementing an interface with javadocs simply generate this:

----- Description copied from interface: #InterfaceName#

#InterfaceMethodJavadoc#

------

This also happen for extensions.

The {@inheritdoc} (at least in my environment) simply "hide" the fact that the doc is identical to the superclass/interface doc so it reduce the available informations. Furthermore if you use {@inheritdoc} you don't have the link to the superclass/interface that you would have with a @see and that is automatically added if you don't have a javadoc at all.

That said, is your complaint about the generated javadoc or the code itself?

Stefano