On 24/01/2013 17:54, Kurchi Hazra wrote:
Thanks Mike, makes sense - I'll change the port number on line 68 to
1080 before pushing.
Agreed, otherwise looks fine to me.
-Chris.
- Kurchi
On 24.01.2013 09:38, Mike Duigou wrote:
Looks good to me. The alternative port example at line 68 uses po
Thanks Mike, makes sense - I'll change the port number on line 68 to
1080 before pushing.
- Kurchi
On 24.01.2013 09:38, Mike Duigou wrote:
Looks good to me. The alternative port example at line 68 uses port 80 which is
the default. 1080 or 8080 perhaps?
Mike
On Jan 24 2013, at 09:27 , Kurch
Looks good to me. The alternative port example at line 68 uses port 80 which is
the default. 1080 or 8080 perhaps?
Mike
On Jan 24 2013, at 09:27 , Kurchi Hazra wrote:
> Apologies, but I have a new suggestion. It is safer to redirect to an archived
> version of the document that we want to link
Apologies, but I have a new suggestion. It is safer to redirect to an
archived
version of the document that we want to link to.
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~khazra/7017962/webrev.01/src/share/classes/java/net/URL.java.sdiff.html
Thanks to Mike for pointing this out.
- Kurchi
On 23.01.2013 05:5
Thanks Kurchi, I'm ok with the changes you have.
-Chris.
On 23/01/2013 00:20, Kurchi Hazra wrote:
The current javadoc for URL.java points to a non-existent link [1] to
explain different types of URLs
used by different protocols. The same document can currently be found at
[2].
Bug: http://bugs
The current javadoc for URL.java points to a non-existent link [1] to
explain different types of URLs
used by different protocols. The same document can currently be found at
[2].
Bug: http://bugs.sun.com/view_bug.do?bug_id=7017962
Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~khazra/7017962/webrev.00/
