Hi Phil\Sergey, As I understand from this, we should remove the AccessibleResourceBundle from JDK in 13(By using @Deprecated(forRemoval = true)) and meanwhile ask the JCK team to remove this test from the test suite?
Should the forremoval needs to be done now or later? Thanks and regards, Shashi -----Original Message----- From: Philip Race Sent: Friday, December 21, 2018 6:54 AM To: Sergey Bylokhov <[email protected]> Cc: Shashidhara Veerabhadraiah <[email protected]>; [email protected]; Dmitry Bessonov <[email protected]>; Krishna Addepalli <[email protected]> Subject: Re: <Swing Dev> [12] JDK-8213516: jck test api/javax_accessibility/AccessibleState/fields.html fails intermittent On 12/20/18, 4:10 PM, Sergey Bylokhov wrote: > On 20/12/2018 15:44, Phil Race wrote: >> The peers were not part of the SE specification. >> This class is, it just became obsolete so has been deprecated which >> on its own has no spec impact. So I would not call it a similar >> situation. > > No it was not part of the spec(and the deprecation notion is unrelated). > The notion that it should not be used and internal use only, is there > from the moment the class was moved to the "javax.accessibility" > package in 1998. It is a public class in a public package and so forth. But you can argue it out with JCK, as it is a waste of time to discuss it further here. -phil. > >> >> As I pointed out in what might have been an off-list comment, we can >> consider the deprecation for removal route, but that wouldn't solve >> the problem today. >> >> But excluding the test is a possible option for 12, so we could defer >> fixing the underlying regression until 13. >> >> -phil. >> >> >> On 12/20/18 3:33 PM, Sergey Bylokhov wrote: >>> On 20/12/2018 15:25, Phil Race wrote: >>>> On 12/20/18 2:51 PM, Sergey Bylokhov wrote: >>>>> I have checked the test which uses AccessibleResourceBundle and I >>>>> have two comments: >>>>> - This test should not be a part of jck since it is not a part of >>>>> public specification. >>>> >>>> What isn't ? Do you mean the class ? >>> >>> I meant the class and the test which use it. BTW this class is a >>> good candidate for "removal=true" >>> >>>> If you mean the comment that it is not supposed to be called by >>>> external applications, then yes, as I already pointed out, but the >>>> class does appear in the spec. >>> >>> It is there because we generate the javadoc for all public classes, >>> but the text for this class clearly state that it should not be >>> used. This situation is similar to the API which uses peers. >>> >> > >
