Actually, @rriggs made a comment in the JBS issue.

https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8382539?focusedId=14873580&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels%3Acomment-tabpanel#comment-14873580

Naoto

On 5/1/26 2:08 PM, David Alayachew wrote:
Ok @Naoto Sato <mailto:[email protected]>, looks like no one else has responded against this. Am I good to attempt a shot at the JBS entry?

On Mon, Apr 20, 2026 at 4:19 PM David Alayachew <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:

    Sounds good. Barring further discussion, I'll jump on this start of May.

    Thank you again!

    On Mon, Apr 20, 2026 at 3:59 PM Naoto Sato <[email protected]
    <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:

        No problem. But let’s leave it for a bit in case someone else
        wants to
        jump into the discussion

        Naoto

        On 4/20/26 12:30 PM, David Alayachew wrote:
         > Wow, ty vm!
         >
         > I see that it is assigned to you -- is that something I could
        volunteer
         > to make a PR for? The implementation appears to be very
        straightforward.
         >
         > Ty again for the help and speedy response.
         >
         >
         > On Mon, Apr 20, 2026, 12:46 PM Naoto Sato
        <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
         > <mailto:[email protected]
        <mailto:[email protected]>>> wrote:
         >
         >     Hi David,
         >
         >     Sounds reasonable to me. Filed an RFE:
         > https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8382539 <https://
        bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8382539> <https://
         > bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8382539 <http://bugs.openjdk.org/
        browse/JDK-8382539>>
         >
         >     Naoto
         >
         >     On 4/19/26 3:45 PM, David Alayachew wrote:
         >      > Hello @core-libs-dev <[email protected]
        <mailto:[email protected]> <mailto:core- <mailto:core->
         > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>>,
         >      >
         >      > The class j.t.f.DateTimeFormatter has BASIC_ISO_DATE,
        but not
         >      > BASIC_ISO_DATE_TIME. That would be very useful for saving
         >     filenames, and
         >      > it's weird that there are several time versions of the
        date
         >     versions in the
         >      > DateTimeFormatter fields section.
         >      >
         >      > Would this make sense to add as a new formatter field on
         >     DateTimeFormatter?
         >      >
         >      > Thank you for your time and consideration.
         >      > David Alayachew
         >


Reply via email to