On Sat, 5 Dec 2020 01:46:31 GMT, Dan Smith wrote:
> Integration of [JEP 390](https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8249100).
>
> Development has been broken into 5 tasks, each with its own JBS issue:
> - Deprecate wrapper class constructors for removal
> - Revise "value-based class" & apply t
Integration of JEP 390, addressing the following issues:
8252180: [JEP 390] Deprecate wrapper class constructors for removal
8254047: [JEP 390] Revise "value-based class" & apply to wrappers
8252181: [JEP 390] Define & apply annotation jdk.internal.ValueBased
8252183: [JEP 390] Add 'lint' warning
On Fri, 4 Dec 2020 14:05:54 GMT, Erik Joelsson wrote:
>> My understanding of JEPs is that they should be viewed as living documents.
>> In this case, I think it's perfectly valid to update JEP 201 with additional
>> source code layout. Both for this and for the other missing dirs.
>
> Regarding
On Fri, 4 Dec 2020 14:03:08 GMT, Erik Joelsson wrote:
>>> And I can certainly move jdwp.spec to java.base instead.
>>
>> If jdwp.spec has to move to the src tree then src/java.se is probably the
>> most suitable home because Java SE specifies JDWP as an optional interface.
>> So nothing to do
On Fri, 4 Dec 2020 12:30:02 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
>> And I can certainly move jdwp.spec to java.base instead. That's the reason I
>> need input on this: All I know is that is definitely not the responsibility
>> of the Build Group to maintain that document, and I made my best guess at
>> wh
On Fri, 4 Dec 2020 11:38:51 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
> And I can certainly move jdwp.spec to java.base instead.
If jdwp.spec has to move to the src tree then src/java.se is probably the most
suitable home because Java SE specifies JDWP as an optional interface. So
nothing to do with jav
On Fri, 4 Dec 2020 11:37:41 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
>> Are you proposing any text or guidelines to be added to JEP 201 as part of
>> this?
>>
>> I think the location of jdwp.spec and its location in the build tree may
>> need to be looked at again. It was convenient to have it in the ma
On Fri, 4 Dec 2020 11:14:49 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
>> To facilitate review, here is a list on how the different directories under
>> make/data has moved.
>>
>> **To java.base:**
>> * blacklistedcertsconverter
>> * cacerts
>> * characterdata
>> * charsetmapping
>> * cldr
>> * currency
>> * lsr
On Fri, 4 Dec 2020 10:29:48 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
>> A lot (but not all) of the data in make/data is tied to a specific module.
>> For instance, the publicsuffixlist is used by java.base, and fontconfig by
>> java.desktop. (A few directories, like mainmanifest, is *actually* used by
>
On Thu, 3 Dec 2020 23:44:20 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
> A lot (but not all) of the data in make/data is tied to a specific module.
> For instance, the publicsuffixlist is used by java.base, and fontconfig by
> java.desktop. (A few directories, like mainmanifest, is *actually* used by
> ma
A lot (but not all) of the data in make/data is tied to a specific module. For
instance, the publicsuffixlist is used by java.base, and fontconfig by
java.desktop. (A few directories, like mainmanifest, is *actually* used by make
for the whole build.)
These data files should move to the module
11 matches
Mail list logo
