[11] Review Request: 8201611 Broken links in java.desktop javadoc

2018-07-02 Thread Sergey Bylokhov
Hello. Please review the fix for jdk11. Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8201611 Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~serb/8201611/webrev.00 Some links in the javadoc became broken after modules were added. -- Best regards, Sergey.

Re: [11] Review Request: 8201611 Broken links in java.desktop javadoc

2018-07-02 Thread Phil Race
> Some links in the javadoc became broken after modules were added Not exactly, it was after javadoc was changed under https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8195795 There are lot of broken links. I also have : https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8205646 This one seems to be different

Re: [11] Review Request: 8201611 Broken links in java.desktop javadoc

2018-07-02 Thread Sergey Bylokhov
On 02/07/2018 09:29, Phil Race wrote: Not exactly, it was after javadoc was changed under https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8195795 So modules are added to the path. This one seems to be different than the other two .. no mention of the module http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~serb/8201611/w

Re: [11] Review Request: 8201611 Broken links in java.desktop javadoc

2018-07-02 Thread Phil Race
OK, +1 -phil. On 07/02/2018 10:09 AM, Sergey Bylokhov wrote: On 02/07/2018 09:29, Phil Race wrote: Not exactly, it was after javadoc was changed under https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8195795 So modules are added to the path. This one seems to be different than the other two .. no

Re: [11] Review Request: 8201611 Broken links in java.desktop javadoc

2018-07-05 Thread Phil Race
Actually .. I've found that Component.java uses a relative link for doc-files in all other cases. I think that you should actually just remove the usage of @docRoot to make it consistent. It is more logical for this case. -phil. On 07/02/2018 10:16 AM, Phil Race wrote: OK, +1 -phil. On 07/

Re: [11] Review Request: 8201611 Broken links in java.desktop javadoc

2018-07-06 Thread Sergey Bylokhov
On 06/07/2018 01:13, Phil Race wrote: Actually .. I've found that Component.java uses a relative link for doc-files in all other cases. I think that you should actually just remove the usage of @docRoot to make it consistent. It is more logical for this case. In this method the "@docRoot" can

Re: [11] Review Request: 8201611 Broken links in java.desktop javadoc

2018-07-06 Thread Phil Race
Oh. Ok. Tricky! -Phil. > On Jul 6, 2018, at 8:00 AM, Sergey Bylokhov > wrote: > >> On 06/07/2018 01:13, Phil Race wrote: >> Actually .. I've found that Component.java uses a relative link for >> doc-files in all other cases. >> I think that you should actually just remove the usage of @docRoo

Re: [OpenJDK 2D-Dev] [11] Review Request: 8201611 Broken links in java.desktop javadoc

2018-07-02 Thread Krishna Addepalli
Looks fine -Original Message- From: Phil Race Sent: Monday, July 2, 2018 10:46 PM To: Sergey Bylokhov ; awt-dev@openjdk.java.net; 2d-dev <2d-...@openjdk.java.net> Subject: Re: [OpenJDK 2D-Dev] [11] Review Request: 8201611 Broken links in java.desktop javadoc OK, +1 -phil. On