On Fri, 28 Mar 2025 09:02:38 GMT, Alan Bateman <al...@openjdk.org> wrote:
> Now that it is being looked at again I think we will need to come up with a > better name for it and also review the semantics and decide if skipping the > extended timestamp fields is okay or whether all timestamps should just > report the timestamp of the zip file itself. That's not for this PR of course. I've created https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8353167 to track that part. ------------- PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/24176#issuecomment-2760674186
