Hi Joe, I guess it could. Given it is not used within the implementation(or defined outside of the spec), I will defer to you preference :-)
> On Sep 14, 2020, at 6:49 PM, Joe Darcy <joe.da...@oracle.com> wrote: > > Should issue have a CSR review for the behavior change? > > -Joe > > On 9/12/2020 7:25 PM, Jaikiran Pai wrote: >> On Sat, 12 Sep 2020 17:38:34 GMT, Lance Andersen <lan...@openjdk.org> wrote: >> >>>> Can I please get a review and a sponsor for this patch which fixes the >>>> issue reported in >>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8244706? >>>> The commit here sets the `OS` header flag to `255` (which represents >>>> `unknown`) as noted in [1]. A new test has been >>>> included in this commit to verify the change. Furthermore, this doesn't >>>> impact the `java.util.zip.GZIPInputStream` >>>> since it ignores [2] this header value while reading the headers from the >>>> stream. [1] >>>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1952#page-7 [2] >>>> https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/blob/master/src/java.base/share/classes/java/util/zip/GZIPInputStream.java#L173 >>> Hi Jaikiran, >>> >>> The change seems fine an inline with the RFC. I can sponsor this once we >>> have another review. >>> >>> I have run the JCK tests for Zip/Gzip/Jar and Mach5 JDK tier1, tier2 and >>> tier3 >> Thank you Lance for the review and running the tests. I'll wait for another >> review before initiating the integrate >> command. >> >> ------------- >> >> PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/130 Best Lance ------------------ Lance Andersen| Principal Member of Technical Staff | +1.781.442.2037 Oracle Java Engineering 1 Network Drive Burlington, MA 01803 lance.ander...@oracle.com
