So rename Bug8161483 to AccessibleActionOnAccessibleJListChild? Do we need input from an SQE lead for guidance for this bug and all future bugs?
Pete On 7/19/16 2:02 PM, Phil Race wrote: > A meaningful name with some relevance to what the test tests ? > > -phil. > > On 07/19/2016 12:03 PM, Pete Brunet wrote: >> >> >> On 7/19/16 1:52 PM, Phil Race wrote: >>> The fix is fine but as I've said elsewhere I really don't like >>> BugXXXXXX as test names. >> Hi Phil, I haven't seen any of your prior comments about this >> matter. I haven't seen any other style so just assumed that is/was >> the standard. Is there an alternative standard I should start to use? >> >> Pete >>> >>> -phil. >>> >>> On 07/19/2016 11:43 AM, Alexandr Scherbatiy wrote: >>>> The fix looks good to me. >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Alexandr. >>>> >>>> On 7/19/2016 8:50 PM, Pete Brunet wrote: >>>>> Look at .02 instead. I had an extraneous println left in .01. >>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ptbrunet/JDK-8161483/webrev.02/ >>>>> >>>>> On 7/19/16 11:48 AM, Pete Brunet wrote: >>>>>> I added a regression test: >>>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ptbrunet/JDK-8161483/webrev.01/ >>>>>> >>>>>> Could someone please review that? >>>>>> >>>>>> I also need one more +1 on the code change. >>>>>> >>>>>> TiA, Pete >>>>>> >>>>>> On 7/19/16 3:17 AM, Alexandr Scherbatiy wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The fix looks good to me. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>> Alexandr. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 7/19/2016 5:10 AM, Pete Brunet wrote: >>>>>>>> Please review the following: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8161483 >>>>>>>> Patch: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ptbrunet/JDK-8161483/webrev.00/ >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> This is a followon to the patch for >>>>>>>> JDK-8145207 [macosx] JList, VO can't access non-visible list items >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> In order to fixJDK-8145207the AccessibleAction interface was >>>>>>>> needed for JList.AccessibleJList.AccessibleJListChild but a >>>>>>>> backport of this fix has been requested and the released public >>>>>>>> API can not be changed in 8u or earlier. The workaround for >>>>>>>> JDK-8145207 is to create and use a private subclass of >>>>>>>> JList.AccessibleJList.AccessibleJListChild, >>>>>>>> JList.AccessibleJList.ActionableAccessibleJListChild. The >>>>>>>> downside of this fix is that it returns a subclass of the >>>>>>>> JList.AccessibleJList.AccessibleJListChild. If a user >>>>>>>> overrides the class and returns from its code it will not >>>>>>>> inherit the AccessibleAction behavior. For JDK 9 the >>>>>>>> ActionableAccessibleJListChild subclass should be removed and >>>>>>>> the AccessibleAction implementation moved to >>>>>>>> JList.AccessibleJList.AccessibleJListChild. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> TiA, >>>>>>>> Pete >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >
