On Fri, 1 Sep 2023 14:59:19 GMT, Jaikiran Pai wrote:
> I asked for Mark's and Joe's inputs on this in the linked JBS issue
> https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8233160. Mark has suggested that we keep
> this `java.vendor.url.bug` system property non-optional and also not to add
> any expectat
On Thu, 31 Aug 2023 06:53:45 GMT, Jaikiran Pai wrote:
> Can I please get a review of this change which proposes to address
> https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8233160?
>
> It has been noted in https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8232753 that:
>
>> The java.vendor.url.bug property has been de
On Thu, 31 Aug 2023 06:53:45 GMT, Jaikiran Pai wrote:
> Can I please get a review of this change which proposes to address
> https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8233160?
>
> It has been noted in https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8232753 that:
>
>> The java.vendor.url.bug property has been de
On Thu, 31 Aug 2023 06:53:45 GMT, Jaikiran Pai wrote:
> Can I please get a review of this change which proposes to address
> https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8233160?
>
> It has been noted in https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8232753 that:
>
>> The java.vendor.url.bug property has been de
On Thu, 31 Aug 2023 06:53:45 GMT, Jaikiran Pai wrote:
> Can I please get a review of this change which proposes to address
> https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8233160?
>
> It has been noted in https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8232753 that:
>
>> The java.vendor.url.bug property has been de
Can I please get a review of this change which proposes to address
https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8233160?
It has been noted in https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8232753 that:
> The java.vendor.url.bug property has been defined by every Sun/Oracle JDK
> going all the way back to JDK 5 (a
