I have to agree with Phil here. Unless we plan on updating the public jdk7 documentation, this just makes the source code differ from what is publicly seen.
-kto On Sep 15, 2012, at 8:26 AM, Phil Race wrote: > On 9/15/12 3:46 AM, David Holmes wrote: >> Phil, >> >> On 15/09/2012 2:57 AM, Phil Race wrote: >>> I really don't think its appropriate to push javadoc changes into an >>> update release without >>> a really, really compelling reason that I don't see here. >> >> That is certainly true if they represent a specification change, but there >> is no semantic change here this is a simple clarification. > > That would just rule it out completely. But we don't even regenerate javadoc > for > the update releases and we have never randomly backported doc comments, for > no obvious reason. So my reasoning and position stands. > > -phil. > >> >> David >> ------ >> >>> A reminder: Update releases aren't a free-for-all. You need to exercise >>> judgement in what >>> has to go in and what is the case for it. We are up to 7u10 now. We need >>> to be dialling >>> back the rate of change and focusing on JDK 8. >>> >>> -phil. >>> >>> >>> On 9/14/2012 12:56 AM, Shi Jun Zhang wrote: >>>> Hi all, >>>> >>>> I'd like to request for approval to push the following change into 7u10. >>>> >>>> Changeset in jdk8 >>>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8/tl/jdk/rev/237e27c7ddc3 >>>> >>>> Webrev >>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~zhangshj/jdk7u/7166055/webrev.00/ >>>> >>>> Reviewed by dholmes, mduigou >>>> >>>> Review thread >>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2012-May/010322.html >>>> >>> >
