Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Ensure exported names in Go packages are properly documented #211

Closed
creachadair opened this issue Nov 19, 2018 · 3 comments
Closed

Ensure exported names in Go packages are properly documented #211

creachadair opened this issue Nov 19, 2018 · 3 comments
Labels
cleanup Improvements that can be implemented without functional changes

Comments

@creachadair
Copy link
Contributor

There are a number of packages missing conventional documentation comments (cf. https://github.com/golang/go/wiki/CodeReviewComments#doc-comments). Given that we advertise these libraries as part of an SDK, we should make an effort to back-fill the ones that are missing.

This helps not only us (speaking as the new person trying to learn his way around), but also our users, who should be able to use godoc.org to good effect.

@creachadair creachadair added the cleanup Improvements that can be implemented without functional changes label Nov 19, 2018
@bzz
Copy link
Contributor

bzz commented Nov 20, 2018

👍 and we could also enable go lint with this check on CI, to avoid further API doc gaps.

@creachadair
Copy link
Contributor Author

The golint checks are mostly good, but there are enough false positives that I'd be reluctant to block changes for all of them. That said, I agree it'd be nice to have some pre-submit linting suggestions.

@dennwc
Copy link
Member

dennwc commented Nov 21, 2018

We may disable most golint checks and leave only ones related to documentation, for example.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
cleanup Improvements that can be implemented without functional changes
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants