Bug 470453 - Java VisualVM integration paragraphs looks weird
Java VisualVM integration paragraphs looks weird
Status: CLOSED UPSTREAM
Product: Fedora Documentation
Classification: Fedora
Component: release-notes (Show other bugs)
devel
All Linux
urgent Severity urgent
: ---
: ---
Assigned To: Release Notes Tracker
Karsten Wade
:
Depends On:
Blocks: fc-relnotes-traqr
  Show dependency treegraph
 
Reported: 2008-11-07 04:45 EST by Mark Wielaard
Modified: 2008-11-07 06:32 EST (History)
0 users

See Also:
Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2008-11-07 06:32:18 EST
Type: ---
Regression: ---
Mount Type: ---
Documentation: ---
CRM:
Verified Versions:
Category: ---
oVirt Team: ---
RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: ---


Attachments (Terms of Use)

  None (edit)
Description Mark Wielaard 2008-11-07 04:45:33 EST
http://docs.fedoraproject.org/release-notes/f10preview/en_US/How_are_Things_for_Developers.html#sn-New_integration_with_other_Fedora_technologies

The section on VisualVM integration looks strange, the program name between brackets (jvisualvm) is put on its own line. The XML has:

   <section id="sn-VisualVM_integration_through_the_NetBeans_framework">
      <title>VisualVM integration through the NetBeans framework</title>
      <para>VisualVM (<programlisting
          format="linespecific">jvisualvm</programlisting>) provides a
        graphical overview of any local or remotely running Java
        application, letting you monitor all running threads, classes,
        and objects allocated by the application by taking thread dumps,
        heap dumps, and other lightweight profiling tools.</para>
    </section>

The programlisting tag should be a filename tag (and shouldn't have a format attribute so that it the sentence is all on the same line.
Comment 1 Karsten Wade 2008-11-07 06:32:18 EST
That's leftover markup from the wiki2xml conversion process, missed in the manual stage of that conversion, thanks for the catch.  Rather than being <filename/>, I think that is either <command/> or <package/>; I went for the former based on context.

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.