I’m happy with the latest iteration of this code. It has my Review.
-Chris.
> On 9 Jan 2020, at 00:54, Aleks Efimov wrote:
>
> Got the testing results: the CI is happy with the last patch - no JNDI test
> failures observed
>
> Kind Regards,
> Aleksei
>
> On 08/01/2020 18:23, Aleks Efimov wro
Hi,
Two small remarks:
ResolverConfigurationImpl.java:
71 if (!l.contains(s)) {
Maybe empty strings should be skipped here too.
I believe it would be more correct to change this line:
117 if (lastRefresh >= 0) {
to
117 if (lastRefresh != -1) {
as Sy
Hi Daniel,
Thanks for the review!
On Thu, Jan 9, 2020 at 9:04 PM Daniel Fuchs wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Two small remarks:
>
> ResolverConfigurationImpl.java:
>
>71 if (!l.contains(s)) {
>
> Maybe empty strings should be skipped here too.
>
Makes sense, added the check.
>
> I believe
Hi all,
Apologies for the spam. I made one more tweak to follow up the previous,
and removed the default value of -1 for lastRefresh. Now that there is no
semantic meaning to -1, I think unspecified default (effectively zero) is
more appropriate and easy to reason about.
Inline patch follows
dif
Hi Anuuraag,
Latest webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~aefimov/anuraaga/7006496/05/
Looks fine to me
CI is also happy
Best Regards,
Aleksei
On 09/01/2020 15:22, Anuraag Agrawal wrote:
Hi all,
Apologies for the spam. I made one more tweak to follow up the
previous, and removed the default va
