On Fri, 29 Apr 2022 02:12:19 GMT, Iris Clark <i...@openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Joe Darcy has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional 
>> commit since the last revision:
>>   Change punctuation from review feedback.
> src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/System.java line 743:
>> 741:      *         have the value {@code "1"}; after a second maintenance
>> 742:      *         release, this property will have the value {@code "2"},
>> 743:      *         and so on.
> There should be no requirement that values be allocated sequentially.  In 
> other words, if JCP MR <x> does not require an RI, then it should not be 
> surprising if there is no JDK build with maintenance version <x>.  As an 
> example, JSR 337 MR 1 and MR 2 both used the same RI.  If this system 
> property had existed during development of MR 1, it would return "1".  Since 
> no RI was submitted for MR 2, a build returning "2" should never exist.  MR 3 
> did update the RI, so it would return "3".

@irisclark does raise an interesting point: If, say, MR 2 doesn’t require a 
change to the RI then the MR 1 RI is also the MR 2 RI, but its 
`java.specification.maintenance.version` property will report that it’s the MR 
1 RI.

One way to fix this would be to require an RI update with every MR just to 
update this property, even if no other code in the RI changes — but we prefer 
to avoid doing RI builds unnecessarily.

Another way to fix it would be to finesse the specification of this property, 

     * <tr><th scope="row">{@systemProperty 
     *     <td>Java Runtime Environment specification maintenance version, 
which may
     *         be interpreted as a non-zero integer. If defined, the value of 
     *         property is the identifying number of the most recent <a
     *         href="https://jcp.org/en/procedures/jcp2#3.6.4";>specification
     *         maintenance release</a> that required a change to the runtime</a>
     *         <em>(optional)</em>.
     *         </td></tr>


PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/8437

Reply via email to