Nested classes should have since tags

[krzyk]

Nested (static and non-static) classes should have @since tags similarly what we have now for main class.

Innorrect:

/**
 * Some.
 *
 * @since 2.78
 */
public final class Some {
...

    /**
     * Other.
     */
     private final static class Other {
    ...
    }
}

Correct:

/**
 * Some.
 *
 * @since 2.78
 */
public final class Some {
...

    /**
     * Other.
     *
     * @since 3.14
     */
     private final static class Other {
    ...
    }
}

[krzyk]

@yegor256 Could you take a look? I'm not sure which way is more along your style, forbidding the tags nested classes, or forcing them.

[yegor256]

@krzyk good question. I think it's better to have them for each class, both nested and normal

[krzyk]

@yegor256 thanks, I've updated the description/title

[krzyk]

@davvd valid bug

[davvd]

@davvd valid bug

@krzyk I added bug tag to this ticket

[davvd]

@krzyk thank you for reporting this, I added 30 mins to your acc, transaction 80479648

[krzyk]

@davvd this is postponed

[davvd]

@davvd this is postponed

@krzyk sure, thanks, I added "postponed" label to it

[davvd]

@davvd this is postponed

@krzyk all right, we'll find someone else for this task

[krzyk]

@0crat in

[0crat]

@0crat in (here)

@krzyk Job #743 is now in scope, role is DEV

[0crat]

Bug was reported, see §29: +15 point(s) just awarded to @krzyk/z

[0crat]

@krzyk/z everybody who has role DEV are banned at this job; I won't be able to assign anyone automatically; consider assigning someone manually (as in §19), or invite more people (as in §51), or remove the job from the scope (as in §14)

[0crat]

@krzyk/z everybody who has role DEV are banned at this job; I won't be able to assign anyone automatically; consider assigning someone manually (as in §19), or invite more people (as in §51), or remove the job from the scope (as in §14)

[0crat]

@krzyk/z everybody who has role DEV are banned at this job; I won't be able to assign anyone automatically; consider assigning someone manually (as in §19), or invite more people (as in §51), or remove the job from the scope (as in §14)

[0crat]

@krzyk/z everybody who has role DEV are banned at #743; I won't be able to assign anyone automatically; consider assigning someone manually (as in §19), or invite more people (as in §51), or remove the job from the scope (as in §14)

[0crat]

@krzyk/z everybody who has role DEV is banned at #743; I won't be able to assign anyone automatically; consider assigning someone manually (as in §19), or invite more people (as in §51), or remove the job from the scope (as in §14)

[0crat]

@krzyk/z everybody who has role DEV is banned at #743; I won't be able to assign anyone automatically; consider assigning someone manually (as in §19), or invite more people (as in §51), or remove the job from the scope (as in §14)

[0crat]

@krzyk/z everybody who has role DEV is banned at #743; I won't be able to assign anyone automatically; consider assigning someone manually (as in §19), or invite more people (as in §51), or remove the job from the scope (as in §14)

[0crat]

@krzyk/z everybody who has role DEV is banned at #743; I won't be able to assign anyone automatically; consider assigning someone manually (as in §19), or invite more people (as in §51), or remove the job from the scope (as in §14)

[0crat]

@krzyk/z everybody who has role DEV is banned at #743; I won't be able to assign anyone automatically; consider assigning someone manually (as in §19), or invite more people (as in §51), or remove the job from the scope (as in §14)

[paulodamaso]

@krzyk Author and version tags are prohibited, please correct puzzle.

[krzyk]

@paulodamaso there is no author or version tag here, which puzzle do you mean?

[paulodamaso]

@krzyk Sorry, I mean ticket description: "Nested classes should have author, version and since tags" is wrong because we do not have version and author tags anymore

[krzyk]

@paulodamaso Oh, thanks, I didn't notice that.

[0pdd]

@krzyk the puzzle #1004 is still not solved.

[krzyk]

@paulodamaso thanks

[0crat]

@ypshenychka/z please review this job completed by @paulodamaso/z, as in §30; the job will be fully closed and all payments will be made when the quality review is completed

[0crat]

The job #743 is now out of scope

[ypshenychka]

@0crat quality good

[0crat]

@0crat quality good (here)

@ypshenychka The project doesn't have enough funds, can't make a payment

[0crat]

Order was finished, quality is "good": +35 point(s) just awarded to @paulodamaso/z

[0crat]

Quality review completed: +8 point(s) just awarded to @ypshenychka/z

[0pdd]

@krzyk the only puzzle #1004 is solved here.