: verona-...@openjdk.java.net; core-libs-dev@openjdk.java.net
Subject: Re: RFR: 8072379: Implement jdk.Version and jdk.OracleVersion
On 03/02/2016 03:17, Iris Clark wrote:
> Hi, Mandy.
>
> Thanks so much for pushing the changeset for the initial
> implementation of jdk.Version!
>
Go
On 03/02/2016 03:17, Iris Clark wrote:
Hi, Mandy.
Thanks so much for pushing the changeset for the initial implementation
of jdk.Version!
Good to have this in but now we need to decide on where it should live.
It's JDK-specific so we'll need it exported by a JDK module rather than
java.base.
gt; From: Iris Clark
> Sent: Monday, January 11, 2016 1:45 PM
> To: Iris Clark; Joe Darcy; Mandy Chung; Magnus Ihse Bursie; Roger Riggs; Alan
> Bateman
> Cc: core-libs-dev@openjdk.java.net; verona-...@openjdk.java.net
> Subject: RE: RFR: 8072379: Implement jdk.Version and jdk.OracleV
-libs-dev@openjdk.java.net; verona-...@openjdk.java.net
Subject: RE: RFR: 8072379: Implement jdk.Version and jdk.OracleVersion
Hi, Joe, Roger, Alan, Magnus, and Mandy.
At the end of December (shortly before the Christmas/Winter break and my
vacation), I provided responses to your messages and an
or will push the changes for 8072379 soon.
Regards,
Iris
-Original Message-
From: Thanh Hong Dai [mailto:hdth...@tma.com.vn]
Sent: Tuesday, February 02, 2016 7:08 PM
To: Iris Clark; Alan Bateman; core-libs-dev@openjdk.java.net
Subject: RE: RFR: 8072379: Implement jdk.Version and jdk.
ark [mailto:iris.cl...@oracle.com]
Sent: Wednesday, 3 February, 2016 6:16 AM
To: Thanh Hong Dai ; Alan Bateman
; core-libs-dev@openjdk.java.net
Subject: RE: RFR: 8072379: Implement jdk.Version and jdk.OracleVersion
Hi.
Thanks again for looking at this change.
> The JEP & implementation allows -$O
tma.com.vn]
Sent: Monday, February 01, 2016 11:48 PM
To: Iris Clark; Alan Bateman; core-libs-dev@openjdk.java.net
Subject: RE: RFR: 8072379: Implement jdk.Version and jdk.OracleVersion
Dear Iris,
On closer look, there seems to be some conflicting definition of version string.
In JEP: http://op
Iris Clark [mailto:iris.cl...@oracle.com]
Sent: Tuesday, 2 February, 2016 12:51 PM
To: Thanh Hong Dai ; Alan Bateman
; core-libs-dev@openjdk.java.net;
verona-...@openjdk.java.net
Subject: RE: RFR: 8072379: Implement jdk.Version and jdk.OracleVersion
Hi, Hong.
Thanks again for looking closely at th
atching `([-a-zA-Z0-9.]+)` --- Additional
Thanks again for the recommendations.
Regards,
iris
-Original Message-
From: Thanh Hong Dai [mailto:hdth...@tma.com.vn]
Sent: Wednesday, January 13, 2016 7:53 PM
To: Iris Clark; Alan Bateman; core-libs-dev@openjdk.java.net;
verona-...@openjdk.jav
Hi, Joe.
> I suggest changing the class-level javadoc discussing comparisons
> to defer to the various compare methods. It would be helpful to
> not which compare methods are consistent with equals and which
> are not.
I've reworked the class and method javadoc for the comparison
methods so t
> On Jan 13, 2016, at 9:27 PM, Iris Clark wrote:
>
> These are the diffs to address both of your comments:
>
> $ diff Version.java_save Version.java
> 28a29,30
>> import java.security.AccessController;
>> import java.security.PrivilegedAction;
> 154,155d155
> < * @see http://openjdk.java.net/
openjdk.java.net; verona-...@openjdk.java.net
Subject: Re: RFR: 8072379: Implement jdk.Version and jdk.OracleVersion
On 2016-01-11 22:44, Iris Clark wrote:
> Hi, Joe, Roger, Alan, Magnus, and Mandy.
>
> At the end of December (shortly before the Christmas/Winter break and
> my vac
I'd like to wrap up this work for the initial implementation of
jdk.Version soon.
Regards,
iris
-Original Message-
From: Iris Clark
Sent: Friday, December 18, 2015 1:55 PM
To: Joe Darcy; Mandy Chung
Cc: core-libs-dev@openjdk.java.net; verona-...@openjdk.java.net
Subject: RE: RFR:
On 13/01/2016 21:54, Iris Clark wrote:
:
This diff has been applied to modules.xml:
This looks okay.
:
When this came up earlier, I filed this bug to track finding
a more appropriate module for jdk.Version:
8144062: Determine appropriate module for jdk.Version
https://bugs.openj
Hi Iris,
Do you consider an option to let community reuse JDK versioning style for their
own purposes. Probably defining an interface with basic default methods which
can be extended by various libraries to provide unified way to gather version
information from MANIFEST.MF, ClassLoader's jars a
Iris,
Did you consider to split version string into array of groups first
(using String.split()), then validate each group separately?
It may make the code better readable and more resilient to possible
future changes.
-Dmitry
On 2015-11-25 04:54, Iris Clark wrote:
> Hi.
>
> Please review the
Hi Daniel,
On 1/13/2016 1:01 AM, Daniel Fuchs wrote:
Hi Joe,
On 1/13/16 2:06 AM, Joseph D. Darcy wrote:
Hi Iris,
Catching up on old reviews, the regular expression for versions is
given as
^[1-9][0-9]*(((\.0)*\.[1-9][0-9]*)*)*$
Is this equivalent to
^[1-9][0-9]*(\.[0-9])*
Ir
om: Mandy Chung
Sent: Tuesday, January 12, 2016 2:26 PM
To: Iris Clark
Cc: Mandy Chung; Joe Darcy; Magnus Ihse Bursie; Roger Riggs; Alan Bateman;
core-libs-dev; verona-...@openjdk.java.net
Subject: Re: RFR: 8072379: Implement jdk.Version and jdk.OracleVersion
> On Jan 11, 2016, at 1:44 PM, Iris
wse/JDK-8144062
Thanks,
iris
[0] http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/rev/1bee5efa73e3
-Original Message-
From: Alan Bateman
Sent: Tuesday, January 12, 2016 7:41 AM
To: Iris Clark; core-libs-dev@openjdk.java.net; verona-...@openjdk.java.net
Subject: Re: RFR: 8072379: Implement jdk.Version and jdk.O
net/jdk9/dev/rev/1bee5efa73e3
-Original Message-
From: Alan Bateman
Sent: Tuesday, January 12, 2016 7:41 AM
To: Iris Clark; core-libs-dev@openjdk.java.net; verona-...@openjdk.java.net
Subject: Re: RFR: 8072379: Implement jdk.Version and jdk.OracleVersion
On 11/01/2016 21:44, Iris Clark wrote:
&
Hi Joe,
On 1/13/16 2:06 AM, Joseph D. Darcy wrote:
Hi Iris,
Catching up on old reviews, the regular expression for versions is given as
^[1-9][0-9]*(((\.0)*\.[1-9][0-9]*)*)*$
Is this equivalent to
^[1-9][0-9]*(\.[0-9])*
Iris's regexp will disallow trailing .0
9.0.1 will match,
ginal Message-
From: Iris Clark
Sent: Friday, December 18, 2015 1:55 PM
To: Joe Darcy; Mandy Chung
Cc: core-libs-dev@openjdk.java.net; verona-...@openjdk.java.net
Subject: RE: RFR: 8072379: Implement jdk.Version and jdk.OracleVersion
Hi, Joe.
Thanks for the review comments.
http://c
> On Jan 11, 2016, at 1:44 PM, Iris Clark wrote:
>
> Hi, Joe, Roger, Alan, Magnus, and Mandy.
>
> At the end of December (shortly before the Christmas/Winter
> break and my vacation), I provided responses to your messages
> and an updated webrev:
>
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iris/verona/
On 11/01/2016 21:44, Iris Clark wrote:
Hi, Joe, Roger, Alan, Magnus, and Mandy.
At the end of December (shortly before the Christmas/Winter
break and my vacation), I provided responses to your messages
and an updated webrev:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iris/verona/8072379/webrev.2/
I didn't
java.net
Subject: RE: RFR: 8072379: Implement jdk.Version and jdk.OracleVersion
Hi, Joe.
Thanks for the review comments.
>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~irisa/verona/8072379/webrev.1/
> Is the intention that downstream JDK distributions, such as IcedTea,
> whether based on
Clark
Cc: core-libs-dev@openjdk.java.net; verona-...@openjdk.java.net
Subject: Re: RFR: 8072379: Implement jdk.Version and jdk.OracleVersion
PS If the concepts the two classes Version and OracleVersion are trying to
capture is a "Vendor-Version" then perhaps that can be surfaced more direct
s for
equals*() and compareTo*() to take advantage of code re-use.
Thanks,
iris
-Original Message-
From: joe darcy
Sent: Monday, November 30, 2015 5:33 PM
To: Magnus Ihse Bursie; Iris Clark; core-libs-dev@openjdk.java.net
Cc: verona-...@openjdk.java.net
Subject: Re: RFR: 8072379: Impl
Hi, Magnus.
Thanks for the review comments.
>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iris/verona/8072379/webrev.1/
> I thought the end agreement was that the + should always be present even if
> build was empty, if opt was present but not pre. That is, "9-foo"
> should unambigiously parse as vnum=9
Hi.
Updated webrev and JavaDoc:
Webrev
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iris/verona/8072379/webrev.2/
JavaDoc
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iris/verona/8072379/doc.2/jdk/Version.html
Thanks,
iris
PS: Please note that I'll be out the week of 21 December, back on
4 January. Access to e
lity it provided, access to the
fourth element of the version number, is trivially accessed by existing methods
in jdk.Version.
jdk.Version is now final, with a private constructor.
An updated webrev is forthcoming.
Regards,
iris
-Original Message-
From: Roger Riggs
Sent: Wednesday, Nove
2015 4:18 PM
To: Mandy Chung; Iris Clark
Cc: verona-...@openjdk.java.net; core-libs-dev@openjdk.java.net
Subject: Re: RFR: 8072379: Implement jdk.Version and jdk.OracleVersion
PPS Perhaps this is already planned as future work, but it might be a kindness
to those analyzing JDK version strings if
Hi, Joe.
Thanks for the review comments.
>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~irisa/verona/8072379/webrev.1/
> Is the intention that downstream JDK distributions, such as
> IcedTea, whether based on OpenJDK or otherwise, would provide
> their own specialization of the jdk.Version class?
No. D
Another comment below...
On 11/27/2015 6:36 AM, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
On 2015-11-25 02:54, Iris Clark wrote:
Hi.
Please review the new classes jdk.Version and jdk.OracleVersion.
These are
simple Java APIs to parse, validate, and compare version numbers.
Bug
8072379: Implement
PPS Perhaps this is already planned as future work, but it might be a
kindness to those analyzing JDK version strings if there was a class
that did a "best effort" at understanding Sun and Oracle JDK version
strings pre-Verona to those post-Verona. In other words, a version class
where
ne
On 2015-11-25 02:54, Iris Clark wrote:
Hi.
Please review the new classes jdk.Version and jdk.OracleVersion. These are
simple Java APIs to parse, validate, and compare version numbers.
Bug
8072379: Implement jdk.Version and jdk.OracleVersion
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JD
PS If the concepts the two classes Version and OracleVersion are trying
to capture is a "Vendor-Version" then perhaps that can be surfaced more
directly in the API. That is, if the basic notion is to interpret a
version string in a way appropriate to and specialized for a given
vendor of the JD
iris
-Original Message-
From: Mandy Chung
Sent: Wednesday, November 25, 2015 8:48 AM
To: Iris Clark
Cc: core-libs-dev@openjdk.java.net; verona-...@openjdk.java.net
Subject: Re: RFR: 8072379: Implement jdk.Version and jdk.OracleVersion
> On Nov 24, 2015, at 5:54 PM, Iris Clark wrote:
&g
> On Nov 24, 2015, at 5:54 PM, Iris Clark wrote:
>
> Hi.
>
> Please review the new classes jdk.Version and jdk.OracleVersion. These are
> simple Java APIs to parse, validate, and compare version numbers.
>
> Webrev
>
>http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iris/verona/8072379/webrev.1/
This looks
Hello,
On 11/25/2015 8:48 AM, Mandy Chung wrote:
On Nov 24, 2015, at 5:54 PM, Iris Clark wrote:
Hi.
Please review the new classes jdk.Version and jdk.OracleVersion. These are
simple Java APIs to parse, validate, and compare version numbers.
Webrev
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~irisa/ve
Hi Iris,
I see the JEP says JDK specific, but does that rule out putting the
version API in a Java.* package?
It would support the values found in the java.version, etc properties.
Perhaps as an nested class of System or Runtime?
Version.java:
Line 213: Seems a bit wasteful to reparse the st
On 25/11/2015 01:54, Iris Clark wrote:
Hi.
Please review the new classes jdk.Version and jdk.OracleVersion. These are
simple Java APIs to parse, validate, and compare version numbers.
Is jdk.OracleVersion really intended to be pushed to OpenJDK? Should it
be final? There are few imports at
Bateman
Sent: Wednesday, November 25, 2015 4:02 AM
To: Iris Clark; core-libs-dev@openjdk.java.net
Cc: verona-...@openjdk.java.net
Subject: Re: RFR: 8072379: Implement jdk.Version and jdk.OracleVersion
On 25/11/2015 01:54, Iris Clark wrote:
> Hi.
>
> Please review the new classes jdk.Vers
42 matches
Mail list logo
