+1
Thanks,
Max
> On Jul 8, 2020, at 8:56 AM, Hai-May Chao wrote:
>
> Hi Tony,
>
> Looks good.
>
> Hai-May
>
>
>> On Jul 7, 2020, at 5:01 PM, Anthony Scarpino
>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I need a code review to fix some copyright headers. The diffs are below
>>
>> thanks
>>
>> Tony
>>
Hi Tony,
Looks good.
Hai-May
> On Jul 7, 2020, at 5:01 PM, Anthony Scarpino
> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I need a code review to fix some copyright headers. The diffs are below
>
> thanks
>
> Tony
>
> --
>
> +++ b/test/jdk/java/security/KeyAgreement/KeyAgreementTest.java
> - * Copyright
Hi,
I need a code review to fix some copyright headers. The diffs are below
thanks
Tony
--
+++ b/test/jdk/java/security/KeyAgreement/KeyAgreementTest.java
- * Copyright (c) 2018, 2020 Oracle and/or its affiliates. All rights
reserved.
+ * Copyright (c) 2018, 2020, Oracle and/or its
Hello Sean,
Thank you for review.
You are right, we can eliminate requirements for connection timeout property.
I’ve added handshakeComletedListener to the LDAP over SSl. In this case we’ll
have no possible performance impact caused by synchronous handshake.
Also, it allows to exclude changes
Thanks!
Valerie
On 7/7/2020 9:00 AM, Weijun Wang wrote:
I see. No more comment.
--Max
On Jul 7, 2020, at 11:53 PM, Valerie Peng wrote:
Hi Max,
Thanks for your review.
Algorithm is also there, so both work technically. With existing APIs, the only
way to check for service registration
I see. No more comment.
--Max
> On Jul 7, 2020, at 11:53 PM, Valerie Peng wrote:
>
> Hi Max,
>
> Thanks for your review.
>
> Algorithm is also there, so both work technically. With existing APIs, the
> only way to check for service registration is to call getService(...) and
> check for
Hi Max,
Thanks for your review.
Algorithm is also there, so both work technically. With existing APIs,
the only way to check for service registration is to call
getService(...) and check for ==. If there were another way to check
service registration, then it makes sense to store Service
> On Jul 7, 2020, at 12:33 AM, Valerie Peng wrote:
>
> Hi Max,
>
> The suggested fix is not much different than the suggested webrev.
I understand they are mostly the same.
>
> The essential change is to call getService(...) for the returned service in
>