Welcome to Software Development on Codidact!
Will you help us build our independent community of developers helping developers? We're small and trying to grow. We welcome questions about all aspects of software development, from design to code to QA and more. Got questions? Got answers? Got code you'd like someone to review? Please join us.
Comments on Should I delete my trivial, lack-of-research question?
Parent
Should I delete my trivial, lack-of-research question?
I asked this trivial question recently:
DocuSign eSignature API SDK: java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError errors.
It turns out, my problem was because I did not do enough research before asking a question. I was new to Maven and did not know that I have to click "Update Project" to install dependencies.
I answered my own question and added "maven" tag, but now I am not sure if I should just delete this question because it is trivial - now that I know the answer - and I am not sure if it's particularly useful to the people of the future.
I saw this post Questions easily answered by studying a beginner-level book, but I still wanted to ask community's opinion about this.
Post
I agree with Dirk Herrmann's answer about this:
What if a question is beginner level? I would say: Someone should answer it.
Some of the beginner level questions on stackoverflow have received answers that explain things in wonderful ways.
While your question seems trivial for a seasoned Java developer, the issue is not obvious for beginners.
It happens that I am a .NET developer that toyed just a little with a Maven project some months ago. In .NET World (Visual Studio, Rider, etc.), dependencies are managed in a more automatic way and when adding a packet, all its dependencies are automatically added to the project. It was very strange when in Java it is pretty easy to miss some dependencies required by your dependencies. Not to mention that I had to often check the pom.xml file due to dependency-related errors.
My suggestion is to keep the question as it might help other folks in the future.
0 comment threads