On 11/7/2015 1:02 AM, Sebastian Sickelmann wrote:
Hi Brad,
The bug is for the complete codebase, where the webrev is for the
net-dev part only. I have already created
a subtask for the macos-port-dev part, and it is fixed already.
Ok.
Now I would create a net-dev part sub-task as well.
For the net-dev part of this JBS-Ticket, it is javadoc only. But for the
rest (jaxp, corba, etc.) it is a little bit more.
Do you want to update your comment in JBS, to limit your analysis to the
net-dev part?
Done.
What do you mean by "Did you make the javadocs target to test?".
Do you think it is worth to write/update tests for the new suggestion
from the javadoc?
No, just that you made the javadoc target and it built ok. I've seen
javadoc typos which caused the build to fail. Just making sure that
didn't happen here.
Brad
-- Sebastian
On 11/06/2015 11:00 PM, Bradford Wetmore wrote:
This bug talks about not only javadoc, but the actual code as well. It
looks like someone has already hit all of that, so this is the only
thing left.
What you've proposed looks ok. Did you make the javadocs target to test?
Brad
On 11/5/2015 7:42 PM, Sebastian Sickelmann wrote:
Hi, i wanted to start an discussion/review-process some time ago, see
second-try below.
Is there someone who wants to discuss/review this javadoc-only change?
Else, should i link my result as reference into the JBS?
-- Sebastian
On 10/27/2015 05:28 AM, Sebastian Sickelmann wrote:
Hello,
Actually I am searching through the JBS for low hanging fruits.
Right now i am looking through the openjdk-sources and try to evaluate
if i can make something about JDK-5108778.
Please find my webrevs for the jdk(net) repos at:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sebastian/5108778/net/webrev.00/
The changes are javadoc only.
-- Sebastian
