I guess another option is to not change the name that is used in the
docs, but change the code to look for both properties, trying the docs
name first, and then the misspelled name.
Not great, but probably the safest and least disruptive option.
--Sean
On 11/5/19 8:07 PM, Xuelei Fan wrote:
I understand your points. Between using the doc name and the code name, I
think using the code name is a little bit safer if someone really use the impl
name. However, just a little bit. I’m open to use the doc name if we could
get an agreement.
Xuelei
On Nov 5, 2019, at 4:32 PM, Anthony Scarpino <anthony.scarp...@oracle.com>
wrote:
I understand the desire to change this, but are we sure the doc should be
changed instead of the property? I would tend to believe users code to the doc
and don’t notice it wasn’t working. Not reading the source code and code to
that implemented name. Otherwise I’d assume someone would have filed a bug
already in the 2yrs.
I don’t want us to support two properties, I’m just not confident which way is
right.
Tony
On Nov 5, 2019, at 4:00 PM, Xuelei Fan <xuelei....@oracle.com> wrote:
Hi,
May I have the CSR reviewed?
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8233652
The system property, "jsse.enableMFLNExtension", was introduced in JDK 9 (See JSSE
Reference Guides). However, the implementation code uses "jsse.enableMFLExtension"
(without 'N') instead.
As the system property may have been used in practice, it may be better to
change the CSR and doc accordingly.
Thanks,
Xuelei
