This all looks OK javadoc-wise.
Although I am quite sure you cannot copyright simply removing a <p> element
so updating the copyright year was entirely a waste of time .. and not
really correct either.
However given that people have annually run scripts that update the (c)
string in
any file updated in the previous year you aren't doing anything that someone
else wouldn't eventually do anyway (still wrongly in many cases).
But in the future you should not touching the copyright. It adds
clutter too.
-phil.
On 7/9/2014 3:59 AM, alexander stepanov wrote:
Sorry for delay; please see the regenerated webrev:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~avstepan/8037511/webrev.00/
Regards,
Alexander
On 01.07.2014 19:07, alexander stepanov wrote:
Hello Phil,
ok, thanks. will do that in the next few days...
Regards,
Alexander
On 30.06.2014 21:33, Phil Race wrote:
Regenerate it against the jdk 9 client repo and I'll take a look.
-phil.
On 6/23/2014 5:16 AM, alexander stepanov wrote:
Could somebody please review this old fix?
Thanks,
Alexander
On 14.04.2014 14:37, alexander stepanov wrote:
Sorry, updated once more (included javax/imageio):
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~yan/8037511/webrev.02/
On 03.04.2014 12:49, alexander stepanov wrote:
Please see the updated webrev:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~yan/8037511/webrev.01/
Files from javax/print were updated too.
Thanks,
Alexander
On 01.04.2014 19:32, alexander stepanov wrote:
Hello,
Could you please review the fix for the following bug:
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8037511
Webrev corresponding:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~yan/8037511/webrev.00/
Just a minor cleanup of javadoc to avoid tidy warnings; no
other code affected.
Thanks.
Regards,
Alexander
