Re: RFR : 8167294 - MXBean javadoc should be updated to take modules into account

2016-10-14 Thread Mandy Chung 

> On Oct 14, 2016, at 1:54 AM, Alan Bateman  wrote:
> 
> On 14/10/2016 09:08, Amit Sapre wrote:
>> Alan,
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> I updated thedescription and changes are available in this webrev
>> 
>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jgeorge/sponsorships/8167294/webrev.01/
>> 
>> 
> I realize I suggested the wording for this but looking at it now then what 
> would you think about changing:
> 
> "(because the java.desktop module is not readable)"   to
> 
> "(e.g. when the java.desktop module is not readable or when the runtime image 
> does not contain the java.desktop module)”

This version is better.

Mandy

Re: RFR : 8167294 - MXBean javadoc should be updated to take modules into account

2016-10-14 Thread Alan Bateman 

On 14/10/2016 09:08, Amit Sapre wrote:


Alan,

I updated the description and changes are available in this webrev

http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jgeorge/sponsorships/8167294/webrev.01/ 




I realize I suggested the wording for this but looking at it now then 
what would you think about changing:


"(because the java.desktop module is not readable)"   to

"(e.g. when the java.desktop module is not readable or when the runtime 
image does not contain the java.desktop module)"


If you agree then no need to regenerate the webrev (for me anyway).

-Alan

RE: RFR : 8167294 - MXBean javadoc should be updated to take modules into account

2016-10-14 Thread Amit Sapre 
Alan,

 

I updated the description and changes are available in this webrev

http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jgeorge/sponsorships/8167294/webrev.01/

 

Amit

 

 

From: Alan Bateman 
Sent: Thursday, October 13, 2016 1:03 PM
To: Amit Sapre; serviceability-dev
Subject: Re: RFR : 8167294 - MXBean javadoc should be updated to take modules 
into account

 

On 13/10/2016 07:42, Amit Sapre wrote:

Hello,

 

Please review this small javadoc update.

 

Bug ID : https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8167294 

Webrev : HYPERLINK 
"http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Ejgeorge/sponsorships/8167294/webrev.00/"http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jgeorge/sponsorships/8167294/webrev.00/
 

 

In the original wording then "@java.beans.ConstructorProperties" refers to the 
annotation. In the updated wording then it's the type, and so the "@" should be 
dropped.  For clarity then it would be good to add "(because the java.desktop 
module is not readable)" as the reader might not immediately understand how it 
is possible for ConstructorProperties to not be visible.

-Alan

Re: RFR : 8167294 - MXBean javadoc should be updated to take modules into account

2016-10-13 Thread Alan Bateman 

On 13/10/2016 07:42, Amit Sapre wrote:


Hello,

Please review this small javadoc update.

Bug ID : https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8167294

Webrev : 
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jgeorge/sponsorships/8167294/webrev.00/ 




In the original wording then "@java.beans.ConstructorProperties" refers 
to the annotation. In the updated wording then it's the type, and so the 
"@" should be dropped.  For clarity then it would be good to add 
"(because the java.desktop module is not readable)" as the reader might 
not immediately understand how it is possible for ConstructorProperties 
to not be visible.


-Alan