On Tue, 8 Aug 2023 11:40:32 GMT, Jaikiran Pai <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> Should we address that in this PR or a separate one? >> >> I'm good with both, but having it as a separate PR might require an >> additional CSR if docs modifications alter the semantics: >> >>> Q: If the text of the javadoc of a public exported API is changing, is a >>> CSR request needed? >>> A: A CSR request is required if the specification of a public exported API. >>> Not all javadoc updates are specification changes. For example, typo fixes >>> and rephrasings that do not alter the semantics of the API in question do >>> not require CSR review. >> >> [[CSR FAQ]](https://wiki.openjdk.org/display/csr/CSR+FAQs) >> >>> Good catch. Fixed. >> >> Thank you > > I spoke to Aleksei about the InetAddressResolver javadoc and whether it > should be updated in this PR. We agreed that we will take it up separately. > I've created https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8313947 to track that > discussion. > > The PR in the current state has all other reviews implemented and I've > updated and finalized the CSR with the text that's in this PR. Thanks for creating a separate bug to track terms used in the `InetAddressResolver` and `InetAddress` classes. This PR looks good to me. ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15134#discussion_r1287083474
