Hi Brad, The bug is for the complete codebase, where the webrev is for the net-dev part only. I have already created a subtask for the macos-port-dev part, and it is fixed already.
Now I would create a net-dev part sub-task as well. For the net-dev part of this JBS-Ticket, it is javadoc only. But for the rest (jaxp, corba, etc.) it is a little bit more. Do you want to update your comment in JBS, to limit your analysis to the net-dev part? What do you mean by "Did you make the javadocs target to test?". Do you think it is worth to write/update tests for the new suggestion from the javadoc? -- Sebastian On 11/06/2015 11:00 PM, Bradford Wetmore wrote: > > This bug talks about not only javadoc, but the actual code as well. It > looks like someone has already hit all of that, so this is the only > thing left. > > What you've proposed looks ok. Did you make the javadocs target to test? > > Brad > > > > On 11/5/2015 7:42 PM, Sebastian Sickelmann wrote: >> Hi, i wanted to start an discussion/review-process some time ago, see >> second-try below. >> >> Is there someone who wants to discuss/review this javadoc-only change? >> >> Else, should i link my result as reference into the JBS? >> >> -- Sebastian >> >> On 10/27/2015 05:28 AM, Sebastian Sickelmann wrote: >>> Hello, >>> >>> Actually I am searching through the JBS for low hanging fruits. >>> Right now i am looking through the openjdk-sources and try to evaluate >>> if i can make something about JDK-5108778. >>> >>> Please find my webrevs for the jdk(net) repos at: >>> >>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sebastian/5108778/net/webrev.00/ >>> >>> The changes are javadoc only. >>> >>> -- Sebastian >>> >>> >>
