Skip to content

Prepare to integrate RxJava 2.x documentation #139

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

Open
DavidMGross opened this issue Aug 27, 2015 · 5 comments
Open

Prepare to integrate RxJava 2.x documentation #139

DavidMGross opened this issue Aug 27, 2015 · 5 comments
Labels

Comments

@DavidMGross
Copy link
Collaborator

DavidMGross commented Aug 27, 2015

2.x implementations of RxJava operators & such may be different in important ways from their counterparts in RxJava 1.x, so we need to be ready to be able to distinguish our documentation of 1.x stuff from 2.x stuff.

@DavidMGross
Copy link
Collaborator Author

For example, accordions that say "RxJava" should probably say "RxJava 1.x" in preparation for 2.x.

See, for instance ReactiveX/RxJava#2780

@DavidMGross DavidMGross changed the title Accordions that say "RxJava" should probably say "RxJava 1.x" in preparation for 2.x Prepare to integrate RxJava 2.x documentation Aug 27, 2015
@DavidMGross
Copy link
Collaborator Author

See ReactiveX/RxJava#3782 and ReactiveX/RxJava#3783 for an overview of some of the changes from 1.x to 2.x

@DavidMGross
Copy link
Collaborator Author

See also ReactiveX/RxJava#4061 (location of 2.x javadocs)

@DavidMGross
Copy link
Collaborator Author

@DavidMGross
Copy link
Collaborator Author

See also ReactiveX/RxJava#4153 for a potential reduction in operator variants and the documentation needs this will cause.

DavidMGross added a commit that referenced this issue Oct 7, 2016
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant