> On Apr 7, 2017, at 4:02 AM, Erik Joelsson wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> This looks good in general. One thing I don't like about this is that if full
> docs is enabled, the docs-javadoc target now requires the full exploded image
> to be built first. I think that's unfortunate. Would it be possible
All the parts of that which I understand look fine to me.
The netbeans XML I know nothing about ..
-phil.
On 4/7/2017 2:05 PM, Alexandre (Shura) Iline wrote:
After some back and forth it was decided that the client demos should stay
intact for JDK9 and be reworked into tests as a part of anoth
After some back and forth it was decided that the client demos should stay
intact for JDK9 and be reworked into tests as a part of another JEP.
With that, could you take another look on the suggested changes?
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~shurailine/8173801/webrev.03
Thank you.
Shura
> On Mar 3
> On Apr 6, 2017, at 1:09 AM, Magnus Ihse Bursie
> wrote:
>
>
> Having though this over real hard, I'd realized I need to make a plea for
> sanity and consistency. I thought I should lay low in this discussion, but I
> can't. Choosing "amd64" as the name for the 64-bit x86 platform is really
Hello,
This looks good in general. One thing I don't like about this is that if
full docs is enabled, the docs-javadoc target now requires the full
exploded image to be built first. I think that's unfortunate. Would it
be possible to introduce separate targets for the gengraphs parts so
that
This bug is the continuation of JDK-8173303, in which Mandy added the
generation of .dot files for @moduleGraph Javadoc tags.
With this patch, the code is taken to it's completion, and the
temporarily solutions left in place by JDK-8173303 has been replaced by
properly integrated solutions.
