RFR  8238167: Remove stray files from jdk.javadoc
pavel.rappo at oracle.com
Wed Jan 29 15:39:13 UTC 2020
Please review the change for https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8238167:
This is a cleanup change that removes a couple of files that I have not found
to be of any use.
The first file, jquery.js, was introduced in
date: Fri Nov 20 20:55:07 2015 +0000
summary: 8141492: Implement search feature in javadoc
That same changeset also brought the jquery-1.10.2.js file. While the contents
of these files were identical, only the latter file was used. Since then both
files have been updated together, with the same content. Every time that happened,
the latter file, jquery-1.10.2.js, was simultaneously renamed to reflect the
version of the JQuery library it was updated with.
As of today, jquery.js is still not used.
The second file, help.html, is part of the test scenario. The file first appeared in
date: Mon Mar 14 15:04:57 2016 -0700
summary: 8071982: Update tests for revamped Doclet API
I flagged this file as suspicious while testing the change for 8237909: Remove
zipped index files feature. I noticed that the TestOptions test did not seem to
care whether the JSZip library was present or not, despite the fact that its
resource, help.html, explicitly referred to that library. Further investigation
showed that this file was never used by that test, or anyone for that matter.
The javadoc tool has only a handful of "help" options:
javadoc -help | grep help
--help, -help, -?, -h
Include file that help link links to
-nohelp Do not generate help link
all of which are covered by the TestHelpOption and TestXOption tests. There
doesn't seem to be any need in testing anything related to "help" options in
TestOptions. Its @summary, otherwise very specific, certainly doesn't mention
anything like that.
Both files, jquery.js and help.html, have been diligently updated over the
years. They seem to be leftovers from the development stage. Since they are not
used, updating those files is a burden to maintainers and provides nothing in
return. I propose to delete them.
All javadoc tests pass, and the functionality of the generated pages
seems to be intact.
More information about the javadoc-dev