g the intention to
remove it after JDK 1).
(I cleaned up the csr a bit to remove extraneous information in the
changset).
Thanks, Roger
On 11/15/2017 8:09 AM, Ujwal Vangapally wrote:
kindly review the changes for bug below.
Bug ID : https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8191313
webrev :
kindly review the updated webrev including changes to
MBeanInfoHashCodeNPETest.java
webrev :
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~uvangapally/webrev/2017/8024352/webrev.05/
Thanks,
Ujwal.
On 11/9/2017 10:33 PM, Ujwal Vangapally wrote:
Thanks for the review Mandy,
kindly check if this version is
kindly review the changes for bug below.
Bug ID : https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8191313
webrev :
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~uvangapally/webrev/2017/8191313/webrev.00/
CSR : https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8191314
Thanks,
Ujwal.
Thanks for the review Mandy,
kindly check if this version is better.
webrev :
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~uvangapally/webrev/2017/8024352/webrev.04/
Ujwal
On 11/9/2017 9:10 PM, mandy chung wrote:
On 11/9/17 2:40 AM, Ujwal Vangapally wrote:
Thanks for the Review Daniel, made changes as
Thanks for the Review Daniel, Roger.
Ujwal
On 11/9/2017 7:52 PM, Roger Riggs wrote:
+1
Looks good,
Thanks, Roger
On 11/9/17 6:34 AM, Daniel Fuchs wrote:
On 09/11/2017 10:40, Ujwal Vangapally wrote:
Thanks for the Review Daniel, made changes as suggested.
webrev :
http
the test (and not simply 2).
best regards,
-- daniel
On 08/11/2017 18:34, Ujwal Vangapally wrote:
Thanks for the suggestions Roger, Mandy.
below is webrev incorporating review comments.
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~uvangapally/webrev/2017/8024352/webrev.02/
CSR: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net
Thanks for the suggestions Roger, Mandy.
below is webrev incorporating review comments.
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~uvangapally/webrev/2017/8024352/webrev.02/
CSR: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8190197
Thanks,
Ujwal
On 11/7/2017 10:48 PM, Ujwal Vangapally wrote:
Hi Roger
change significantly.
Kindly clarify.
As it changes the constructor signature if we introduce a Enum,
but as we can solve the issue by throwing IAE, do we still need to
introduce Enum and change method signature.
Thanks,
Ujwal.
$.02, Roger
On 11/7/2017 6:05 AM, Ujwal Vangapally wrote:
Kind
Kindly review the fix for bug below.
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8024352
webrev :
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~uvangapally/webrev/2017/8024352/webrev.00/
Thanks,
Ujwal.
Thanks for the review Mandy,
built image and verified everything is as expected.
Ujwal.
On 11/7/2017 11:45 AM, mandy chung wrote:
Looks good to me.
Please do make docs target to verify.
Mandy
On 11/6/17 9:34 PM, Ujwal Vangapally wrote:
Hi,
kindly take a look at latest changes.
webrev
Hi,
kindly take a look at latest changes.
webrev:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~uvangapally/webrev/2017/8044122/webrev.05/
Thanks,
Ujwal.
On 10/31/2017 9:20 AM, Ujwal Vangapally wrote:
Thanks for the Review Roger, Mandy.
Ujwal.
On 10/31/2017 4:09 AM, mandy chung wrote:
On 10/30/17 9
Thanks for the Review Roger, Mandy.
Ujwal.
On 10/31/2017 4:09 AM, mandy chung wrote:
On 10/30/17 9:50 AM, Ujwal Vangapally wrote:
Hi Mandy,
yes, this makes it more clear.
kindly take a look at new webrev.
webrev :
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~uvangapally/webrev/2017/8044122/webrev.04
.
RuntimeMXBean for the Java platform obtained from {@link
ManagementFactory} supports this operation.
Mandy
On 10/26/17 9:36 AM, Ujwal Vangapally wrote:
Hi Roger,
made changes as suggested.
webrev :
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~uvangapally/webrev/2017/8044122/webrev.03/
Thanks,
Ujwal.
On 10/26
Otherwise, looks fine.
Thanks, Roger
On 10/26/2017 4:29 AM, Ujwal Vangapally wrote:
Thanks for the review Mandy, Roger, Harsha, Christoph.
kindly see the new webrev incorporating review comments.
webrev:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~uvangapally/webrev/2017/8044122/webrev.02/
csr : https
4:42:00 PM
*To:* Ujwal Vangapally; Roger Riggs
*Cc:* serviceability-dev
*Subject:* Re: RFR : JDK-8044122 MBean access to the PID
Process::pid may throw SecurityException. You have to wrap the call
with doPrivileged. Process::pid can throw UOE on platform that doesn't
support this oper
Thanks for the review Roger, I will correct the copyright date.
Ujwal.
On 10/20/2017 7:37 PM, Roger Riggs wrote:
Hi Ujwal,
Looks fine.
Please correct the copyright date in ProcessIdTest. A new file
usually has only the current year.
Thanks, Roger
On 10/20/17 2:07 AM, Ujwal Vangapally
kindly see the new webrev incorporating review comments.
webrev:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~uvangapally/webrev/2017/8044122/webrev.01/
Thanks,
Ujwal.
On 10/11/2017 3:50 PM, Ujwal Vangapally wrote:
Thanks for the review and suggestions Mandy, Roger.
kindly see my comments inline.
On 10
m. Perhaps MXBeanInteropTest1.java
I will make changes as suggested.
Roger
On 10/10/2017 1:20 PM, mandy chung wrote:
On 10/10/17 4:47 AM, Ujwal Vangapally wrote:
Kindly review the changes made.
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8044122
webrev :
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~u
be sufficient if I verify that by comparing it with
ProcessHandle.current().pid()
Also, VMManagementImpl:145, the change from getProcessId to getVmPid
seems unnecessary.
I will revert it back if not required.
-Harsha
On Tuesday 10 October 2017 05:17 PM, Ujwal Vangapally wrote:
Kindly
Thanks for the review Alan,
will make that change in next webrev.
Ujwal.
On 10/10/2017 5:27 PM, Alan Bateman wrote:
On 10/10/2017 12:47, Ujwal Vangapally wrote:
Kindly review the changes made.
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8044122
webrev :
http://cr.openjdk.java.net
Kindly review the changes made.
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8044122
webrev :
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~uvangapally/webrev/2017/8044122/webrev.00/
CSR : https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8189091
Thanks,
Ujwal.
kindly see the updated webrev incorporating review comments.
webrev :
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~uvangapally/webrev/2017/8185003/webrev.06/
Thanks
Ujwal
On 8/11/2017 11:41 PM, mandy chung wrote:
On 8/9/17 10:15 AM, Ujwal Vangapally wrote:
Thanks for the review Mandy,
kindly see my
Thanks for the review Christoph.
-Ujwal
On 8/28/2017 10:56 AM, Langer, Christoph wrote:
Hi Ujwal,
the changes look good to me.
Best regards
Christoph
-Original Message-
From: serviceability-dev [mailto:serviceability-dev-
boun...@openjdk.java.net] On Behalf Of Ujwal Vangapally
Can someone please review the changes, I need a second reviewer.
Thanks,
Ujwal.
On 8/24/2017 9:59 PM, Ujwal Vangapally wrote:
Thanks for the Review Harsha.
-Ujwal.
On 8/24/2017 2:13 PM, Harsha Wardhana B wrote:
Hi Ujwal,
The changes look good.
Thanks
Harsha
On Tuesday 22 August 2017
Thanks for the Review Harsha.
-Ujwal.
On 8/24/2017 2:13 PM, Harsha Wardhana B wrote:
Hi Ujwal,
The changes look good.
Thanks
Harsha
On Tuesday 22 August 2017 02:11 PM, Ujwal Vangapally wrote:
Kindly review the changes made.
Before these changes tests fail on windows if we execute them
Kindly review the changes made.
Before these changes tests fail on windows if we execute them from any
Drive other than C.
grant codebase "file:/-" {} is granting permissions only to code
present in C Drive on windows.
Hence changing'grant codebase "file:/-" {} ' to grant {} will sol
ption.
best regards,
-- daniel
On 11/08/2017 14:20, Ujwal Vangapally wrote:
Gentle Reminder.
On 8/9/2017 10:45 PM, Ujwal Vangapally wrote:
Thanks for the review Mandy,
kindly see my comments inline.
webrev:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~uvangapally/webrev/2017/8185003/webrev.03/
csr:
Gentle Reminder.
On 8/9/2017 10:45 PM, Ujwal Vangapally wrote:
Thanks for the review Mandy,
kindly see my comments inline.
webrev:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~uvangapally/webrev/2017/8185003/webrev.03/
csr: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8185705
Ujwal
On 8/9/2017 5:23 AM
Thanks for the review Mandy,
kindly see my comments inline.
webrev:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~uvangapally/webrev/2017/8185003/webrev.03/
csr: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8185705
Ujwal
On 8/9/2017 5:23 AM, mandy chung wrote:
On 8/8/17 1:27 AM, Ujwal Vangapally wrote:
Hi
?
best regards
-- daniel
On 08/08/2017 09:27, Ujwal Vangapally wrote:
Hi,
below is the link to new webrev incorporating review comments.
webrev:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~uvangapally/webrev/2017/8185003/webrev.02/
verified that
MBeanServerConnection.invoke throws ReflectionException when
Hi,
below is the link to new webrev incorporating review comments.
webrev:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~uvangapally/webrev/2017/8185003/webrev.02/
verified that
MBeanServerConnection.invoke throws ReflectionException when invoked with a
method that doesn't exist in remote MBean server.
Unde
izers);
should allow specifying the maxDepth too.
Mandy
On 8/3/17 11:30 PM, Ujwal Vangapally wrote:
Thanks for the review Daniel, Mandy, Roger, Erik.
I will make changes accordingly and come up with new webrev soon.
-Ujwal
On 8/4/2017 5:42 AM, Mandy Chung wrote:
On Aug 3, 2017, at 2:10 PM, D
Thanks for the review Daniel, Mandy, Roger, Erik.
I will make changes accordingly and come up with new webrev soon.
-Ujwal
On 8/4/2017 5:42 AM, Mandy Chung wrote:
On Aug 3, 2017, at 2:10 PM, Daniel Fuchs wrote:
Hi Mandy,
On 03/08/17 21:04, Mandy Chung wrote:
Adding a public method to an i
vention so that it will not affect getThreadInfo
method with maxDepth argument.
Thanks, Roger
Thanks,
Ujwal
On 8/3/2017 10:18 AM, Ujwal Vangapally wrote:
kindly use the below link for accessing webrev
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~uvangapally/webrev/2017/8185003/webrev.01/
previously shared l
Thanks for the review Erik,
I will investigate more considering Daniel's comment.
Adding a public method to an interface is an incompatible source change
unless there is a default body. On the other hand I am not sure how
MXBean proxies will work when proxying an interface containing a default
kindly use the below link for accessing webrev
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~uvangapally/webrev/2017/8185003/webrev.01/
previously shared link is no longer accessible hence providing this new
link.
Thanks,
Ujwal.
On 8/3/2017 3:08 PM, Ujwal Vangapally wrote:
Hi,
kindly review the changes
Hi,
kindly review the changes made.
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8185003
webrev:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~uvangapally/webrev/2017/8185003/webrev.00/
CSR: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8185705
Thanks,
Ujwal.
On 7/18/2017 7:20 AM, Ujwal Vangapally wrote:
Hi,
kindly review the changes made.
previously technotes were present in pubs repo at
/pubs/docs/technotes/guides/
pubs repo has been removed by JDK-8175825
now we can't include content from that repo in our generated docs.
currently
Thanks for the review Alan.
will update the spec and send a new webrev after getting approval for
this fix.
-Ujwal.
On 7/19/2017 1:25 PM, Alan Bateman wrote:
On 19/07/2017 06:20, Ujwal Vangapally wrote:
Hi,
Kindly review the fix
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-6396411
webrev
utions.
Gruss
Bernd
--
http://bernd.eckenfels.net
*From:* serviceability-dev
on behalf of Ujwal
Vangapally
*Sent:* Wednesday, July 19, 2017 7:20:12 AM
*To:* serviceability-dev
*Subject:* RFR: JDK-6396411 java.lang.management.
Hi,
Kindly review the fix
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-6396411
webrev:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~uvangapally/webrev/2017/6396411/webrev.00/
Thanks,
Ujwal.
Hi,
kindly review the changes made.
previously technotes were present in pubs repo at
/pubs/docs/technotes/guides/
pubs repo has been removed by JDK-8175825
now we can't include content from that repo in our generated docs.
currently there is no other way to access the content available in
vadoc ?
https://docs.oracle.com/javase/8/docs/technotes/guides/jmx/JMX_1_4_specification.pdf
Thanks,
Ujwal.
On 7/13/2017 3:39 PM, Alan Bateman wrote:
On 13/07/2017 10:44, Ujwal Vangapally wrote:
Thanks for the review Alan.
Previously JMX spec was present at
/pubs/docs/techn
Thanks for the review Alan.
-Ujwal
On 7/13/2017 12:44 PM, Alan Bateman wrote:
On 13/07/2017 08:06, Ujwal Vangapally wrote:
Hi,
kindly review this small change
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8183899
webrev :
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~uvangapally/webrev/2017/8183899/webrev.00
/2017 12:46 PM, Alan Bateman wrote:
On 13/07/2017 08:01, Ujwal Vangapally wrote:
Hi,
kindly review this small change
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8183900
webrev :
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~uvangapally/webrev/2017/8183900/webrev.00/
This removes a potentially useful reference. I
Hi,
kindly review this small change
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8183899
webrev :
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~uvangapally/webrev/2017/8183899/webrev.00/
Thanks,
Ujwal
Hi,
kindly review this small change
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8183900
webrev :
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~uvangapally/webrev/2017/8183900/webrev.00/
Thanks,
Ujwal
t mistaken then this will make it impossible
for earlier release to interoperate with newer releases
as the LocalRMIClientSocketFactory class will not be
present the client tries to deserialize the stub.
best regards,
-- daniel
On 19/06/2017 11:52, Ujwal Vangapally wrote:
Hi,
Kindly revie
Hi,
Kindly review the fix for bug below
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8173180
webrev:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~uvangapally/webrev/2017/8173180/webrev.00/
Thanks,
Ujwal
Thanks a lot for the review Mandy, Igor, Harsha .
-Ujwal.
On 6/14/2017 10:38 PM, Igor Ignatyev wrote:
looks good to me as well.
-- Igor
On Jun 14, 2017, at 10:06 AM, Ujwal Vangapally
mailto:ujwal.vangapa...@oracle.com>> wrote:
Hi Igor can you kindly review this.
Thanks,
Ujwal
O
Hi Igor can you kindly review this.
Thanks,
Ujwal
On 6/14/2017 9:40 AM, Mandy Chung wrote:
On Jun 13, 2017, at 8:13 PM, Ujwal Vangapally
mailto:ujwal.vangapa...@oracle.com>> wrote:
Thanks for the review Mandy.
updated webrev with simplified version using @requires
os.simpleArch
penjdk.java.net/~uvangapally/webrev/2017/8178508/webrev.03/
-Ujwal
On 6/14/2017 7:18 AM, Mandy Chung wrote:
On Jun 13, 2017, at 1:39 AM, Ujwal Vangapally
mailto:ujwal.vangapa...@oracle.com>> wrote:
Hi Mandy,
made multi-line @summary as last tag.
yes it was simpler before and we
/2017 7:28 AM, Mandy Chung wrote:
On Jun 8, 2017, at 4:13 AM, Ujwal Vangapally
mailto:ujwal.vangapa...@oracle.com>> wrote:
Thanks for the Review Mandy, Igor, Harsha.
below is the link for new webrev incorporating review comments.
webrev:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~uvangapally/web
Please use the below link for new webrev, link in my previous reply is
redirecting to old webrev
webrev :
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~uvangapally/webrev/2017/8178508/webrev.01/
Thanks,
Ujwal.
On 6/8/2017 4:43 PM, Ujwal Vangapally wrote:
Thanks for the Review Mandy, Igor, Harsha.
below
0:29 PM, Mandy Chung wrote:
On Jun 5, 2017, at 9:48 AM, Mandy Chung <mailto:mandy.ch...@oracle.com>> wrote:
On 5/31/2017 10:32 AM, Ujwal Vangapally wrote:
webrev :
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~uvangapally/webrev/2017/8178508/webrev.00/
<http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Euvangapally/w
Gentle reminder.
Thanks,
Ujwal.
On 5/31/2017 10:32 AM, Ujwal Vangapally wrote:
Kindly review the changes made for below bug
converted tonga test to JTREG test
added an additional assert statement for verifying setusageThreshold()
operation is successful
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net
Kindly review the changes made for below bug
converted tonga test to JTREG test
added an additional assert statement for verifying setusageThreshold()
operation is successful
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8178508
tonga test case is currently at this path :
http://sqe-hgi.us.oracl
Thanks for the review Mandy.
Please find the new webrev incorporating the review comments
webrev :
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~uvangapally/webrev/2017/8175845/webrev.01/
On 5/17/2017 11:59 PM, Mandy Chung wrote:
On May 17, 2017, at 3:42 AM, Ujwal Vangapally
wrote:
Kindly review this
Kindly review this small change
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8175845
webrev:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~uvangapally/webrev/2017/8175845/webrev.00/
Thanks,
Ujwal.
6 PM, Daniel Fuchs wrote:
On 08/05/2017 09:45, Ujwal Vangapally wrote:
Thanks for the Review Daniel, Harsha
Please find the new webrev incorporating the review comments
webrev :
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~uvangapally/webrev/2017/6515161/webrev.01/
Looks good. In retrospect I wonder if re
x27;s' at the end of the
method.
Both would be acceptable.
best regards,
-- daniel
On 04/05/17 07:59, Ujwal Vangapally wrote:
corrected webrev link :
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~uvangapally/webrev/2017/6515161/webrev.00/
On 5/4/2017 12:14 PM, Ujwal Vangapally wrote:
Kindly review t
corrected webrev link :
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~uvangapally/webrev/2017/6515161/webrev.00/
On 5/4/2017 12:14 PM, Ujwal Vangapally wrote:
Kindly review the changes made for below bug
Problem description and solution are explained in comments section
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse
Kindly review the changes made for below bug
Problem description and solution are explained in comments section
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-6515161
diff for*ClientNotifForwarder.java *might be a bit confusing as it shows
the method name
removeNotificationListener is modified to
Kindly review the changes made for below bug
Problem description and solution are explained in comments section
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-6515161
diff for*ClientNotifForwarder.java *might be a bit confusing as it shows
the method name
removeNotificationListener is modified to
Daniel, David
Thanks for the review :-)
-Ujwal
On 4/18/2017 5:39 PM, David Holmes wrote:
Hi Daniel,
On 18/04/2017 8:39 PM, Daniel Fuchs wrote:
On 18/04/2017 05:20, David Holmes wrote:
Hi Ujwal,
On 14/04/2017 4:25 PM, Ujwal Vangapally wrote:
Please review this small change
https
Please review this small change
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8130084
Webrev:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~uvangapally/webrev/2017/8130084/webrev.00/
Thanks,
Ujwal.
Gentle reminder
On 1/13/2017 1:56 PM, Ujwal Vangapally wrote:
kindly review the fix for bug JDK-8024352
Bug Id : https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8024352
webrev :
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~asapre/sponsorships/Ujwal/JDK-8024352/webrev.00/
Thanks,
Ujwal.
kindly review the fix for bug JDK-8024352
Bug Id : https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8024352
webrev :
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~asapre/sponsorships/Ujwal/JDK-8024352/webrev.00/
Thanks,
Ujwal.
Thanks for the review David, I hope this is good enough for me to push
the changes.
Ujwal
On 12/20/2016 12:22 PM, David Holmes wrote:
Looks fine.
Thanks,
David
On 20/12/2016 4:29 PM, Ujwal Vangapally wrote:
Please review this small change
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8170861
Please review this small change
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8170861
webrev:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~asapre/sponsorships/Ujwal/JDK-8170861/webrev.00/
Thanks,
Ujwal.
:
Hi Ujwal,
looks fine.
Have you been able to verify the test on a system similar to where it
failed originally?
Thanks, Roger
On 11/27/2016 11:47 PM, Ujwal Vangapally wrote:
gentle reminder
Thanks,
Ujwal
On 11/24/2016 1:50 PM, Ujwal Vangapally wrote:
Thanks for the review Roger, p
gentle reminder
Thanks,
Ujwal
On 11/24/2016 1:50 PM, Ujwal Vangapally wrote:
Thanks for the review Roger, please find the new webrev incorporating
the review comments.
webrev :http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~hb/sponsorship/8165765/webrev.01/
-Ujwal
On 11/23/2016 10:10 PM, Roger Riggs wrote
(addr) may be a better
choice
without all the looping and repetitive checks of localAddr == null.
Roger
p.s.
This would have been a good use of streams with
NetworkInterface.networkInterfaces
and NetworkInterface.inetAddresses.
On 11/23/2016 4:08 AM, Ujwal Vangapally wrote:
Please
Please review this small change for the bug below
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8165765
Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~hb/sponsorship/8165765/webrev.00/
Thanks,
Ujwal.
n("No notif received!");
David
-
/Robbin ('r'eviewer)
On 11/04/2016 12:03 PM, Ujwal Vangapally wrote:
Please review this small change for the bug below
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8168141
Webrev:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~asapre/sponsorships/Ujwal/JDK-8168141/webrev.01/
Thanks,
Ujwal.
Gentle remainder
Thanks,
Ujwal.
On 11/4/2016 4:33 PM, Ujwal Vangapally wrote:
Please review this small change for the bug below
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8168141
Webrev:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~asapre/sponsorships/Ujwal/JDK-8168141/webrev.01/
Thanks,
Ujwal.
Please review this small change for the bug below
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8168141
Webrev:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~asapre/sponsorships/Ujwal/JDK-8168141/webrev.01/
Thanks,
Ujwal.
77 matches
Mail list logo
