I have pushed your fix to the JDK 9:
http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/client/jdk/rev/deb544c19dec
Thanks,
Alexandr.
On 10/21/2015 8:59 PM, Sebastian Sickelmann wrote:
On 10/20/2015 12:23 PM, Alexander Scherbatiy wrote:
On 10/13/2015 10:32 PM, Sebastian Sickelmann wrote:
On 10/08/2015
On 10/20/2015 12:23 PM, Alexander Scherbatiy wrote:
> On 10/13/2015 10:32 PM, Sebastian Sickelmann wrote:
>> On 10/08/2015 01:06 PM, Alexander Scherbatiy wrote:
>>>Are you going to push the fix as part of other fixes for different
>>> JDK areas or as a separate fix?
>>>In the second case yo
On 10/13/2015 10:32 PM, Sebastian Sickelmann wrote:
On 10/08/2015 01:06 PM, Alexander Scherbatiy wrote:
Are you going to push the fix as part of other fixes for different
JDK areas or as a separate fix?
In the second case you need to file a new bug for it.
I think the patches in the othe
On 10/08/2015 01:06 PM, Alexander Scherbatiy wrote:
>
> Are you going to push the fix as part of other fixes for different
> JDK areas or as a separate fix?
> In the second case you need to file a new bug for it.
>
I think the patches in the other areas are much bigger than
this(macosx-port-dev
Looks fine to me too.
On 10/08/2015 01:06 PM, Alexander Scherbatiy wrote:
>
> The fix looks good to me.
>
Thank.
> Note that there are usually necessary to have at least two reviewers
> for a fix in Open JDK.
I thought patches before feature complete needs only one reviewer. [4][5]
But two reviewers are always bet
The fix looks good to me.
Note that there are usually necessary to have at least two reviewers
for a fix in Open JDK.
Are you going to push the fix as part of other fixes for different
JDK areas or as a separate fix?
In the second case you need to file a new bug for it.
Thanks,
On 10/6/15 6:06 AM, Alexander Scherbatiy wrote:
On 10/3/2015 5:40 AM, Stuart Marks wrote:
The weird one is in AquaTabbedPaneUI.java, which has
protected Boolean isDefaultFocusReceiver = null;
I do not mean to change the isDefaultFocusReceivertype type to boolean. It
was just interesti
Please find the updated webrev at:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sebastian/5108778/macos/webrev.00/
For some general discussion on regression-tests for this please find the
thread in discuss[0][1] and for the general suggestion to make more
wrapper-type-constructors deprecated find [2] at core-libs
On 10/3/2015 5:40 AM, Stuart Marks wrote:
On 9/28/15 2:03 AM, Alexander Scherbatiy wrote:
Is it possible to use autoboxing in the fix instead of
Boolean.valueOf(someBooleanVariable)?
Hi,
These cases are all interesting because they end up requiring boxed
Boolean values, whether explicitl
On 9/28/15 2:03 AM, Alexander Scherbatiy wrote:
Is it possible to use autoboxing in the fix instead of
Boolean.valueOf(someBooleanVariable)?
Hi,
These cases are all interesting because they end up requiring boxed Boolean
values, whether explicitly or implicitly via autoboxing:
1. AquaTa
Yes it is the only (non-test) source i could find in hotspot, but i want
to change it in all openjdk sources i can find it.
I thought i really must discuss it part by part in the mailing-lists.
Actually i am working on the issue to save against regression on this.
Thanks Alexandr for this input. So
On 9/26/2015 6:42 PM, Sebastian Sickelmann wrote:
Hello,
my name is Sebastian Sickelmann and i signed the OCA.
Actually I am searching through the JBS for low hanging fruits.
Right now i am looking through the openjdk-sources and try to evaluate
if i can make something about JDK-5108778.
As i
Hello,
my name is Sebastian Sickelmann and i signed the OCA.
Actually I am searching through the JBS for low hanging fruits.
Right now i am looking through the openjdk-sources and try to evaluate
if i can make something about JDK-5108778.
As i am not an author, i am actually not able to host web
14 matches
Mail list logo
