On 3/3/14 5:38 AM, Sean Mullan wrote:
On 02/28/2014 02:56 PM, Jason Uh wrote:
Could I please get a review of this change?
Looks fine to me, but the priority should be higher if this requires a
backport to 7u. Also, the bug should be labeled with "8-na" and "9-na"
since this is not an issue in
On 02/28/2014 02:56 PM, Jason Uh wrote:
Could I please get a review of this change?
Looks fine to me, but the priority should be higher if this requires a
backport to 7u. Also, the bug should be labeled with "8-na" and "9-na"
since this is not an issue in 8 and 9.
--Sean
Just a simple fi
On 3/1/2014 7:38 AM, Jason Uh wrote:
> Do I need more than one noreg tag? I already have noreg-sqe.
>
noreg-sqe is OK.
Thanks,
Xuelei
> On 2/28/14 3:31 PM, Xuelei Fan wrote:
>> Looks fine to me. noreg-trivial tag?
>>
>> Xuelei
>>
>> On 3/1/2014 3:56 AM, Jason Uh wrote:
>>> Could I please get a
Do I need more than one noreg tag? I already have noreg-sqe.
On 2/28/14 3:31 PM, Xuelei Fan wrote:
Looks fine to me. noreg-trivial tag?
Xuelei
On 3/1/2014 3:56 AM, Jason Uh wrote:
Could I please get a review of this change?
Just a simple fix for 7u-dev that adds a check for a null CertStore
Looks fine to me. noreg-trivial tag?
Xuelei
On 3/1/2014 3:56 AM, Jason Uh wrote:
> Could I please get a review of this change?
>
> Just a simple fix for 7u-dev that adds a check for a null CertStore, in
> case URICertStore.getInstance returns null.
>
> webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~juh/8
Could I please get a review of this change?
Just a simple fix for 7u-dev that adds a check for a null CertStore, in
case URICertStore.getInstance returns null.
webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~juh/8035973/webrev.00/
bug: http://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8035973
noreg-sqe because an
