On 10/21/2013 05:05 PM, Rob McKenna wrote:
Thanks Chris,
I don't mind deferring. Nobody is shouting at me to get this fixed at
the moment.
OK, thanks. If this is just clearing the plate before ZBB, then simply
target to tbd_minor and archive the webrev/diffs for future.
-Chris.
-Rob
On 21/10/13 16:21, Chris Hegarty wrote:
Hi Rob,
The changes look fine. ( Trivially the copyright year on the test
should be 2013 ).
Coming so late in the JDK8 development cycle, only P1-3 bugs are being
accepted [1]. I see this is a P4. Should it be deferred to the next
available minor update, or do you think it warrants being fixed in jdk8.
-Chris.
[1] http://openjdk.java.net/projects/jdk8/milestones#Rampdown_start
On 18/10/2013 18:36, Rob McKenna wrote:
Hi folks,
Simple enough change here. As per the description HttpCookie.setMaxAge
will set any arbitrary negative value, while we only check for
MAX_AGE_UNSPECIFIED to determine whether a cookies max age has been
specified or not. This fix sets maxAge to MAX_AGE_UNSPECIFIED if the
setMaxAge(expiry) parameter is < 0.
In addition to that HttpCookie.parse(header) incorrectly sets the maxAge
to a negative value if the expires attribute is in the past. This
effectively means it is unspecified instead of expired. This fix sets
such maxAge values to 0 (expire immediately) instead.
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8005068
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~robm/8005068/webrev.01/
-Rob
