Javadoc improvements, etc

[sailsman63]

The contribution guidelines suggest opening a topic here before generating pull requests.

Is this true for smallish stuff like javadoc reformatting/typo fixes, etc?

What about documenting things that have no (or minimal) javadoc?

[tlf30]

It would be great to have stuff documented in javadocs. What did you have in mind?

Also if you want to help with other things, there is a list of issues that we would like help with:

The Contribution Mega-Thread

Adding jme3-lwjgl3 library not included in the SDK · Issue #193 · jMonkeyEngine/sdk · GitHub there. The library has to be added into the gradle dependencies. When you look into the gradle file you see how it’s handled. The only difficulty is ensuring to not make the sdk run on lwjgl3 (or both, I don’t know what it would pick then), so it has to be something optional I think

[sailsman63]

Primarily typos, and some formatting choices that do not do what the author thought they did. (Been on a bit of a delve)

Is also like to get a bit of doc together that pulls the descriptions of all the standard shader nodes into the javadoc.

I’m watching that thread, may act if my abilities and interests intersect with an issue.

[tlf30]

I think that would be great! I would love to see the javadocs expanded on and flushed out.
I look forward to seeing your PR

EDIT: Also, thank you for reading the contribution guide. Many people do not bother.

[louhy]

To address the first question, probably not necessary to start a thread about individual small changes unless maybe there’s some uncertainty whether they’re correct. More so for large or potentially risky/controversial changes or additions. If something on GitHub needs deeper discussion here, someone will bring it up.