JDK 9 RFR of JDK-8151763; Use more informative format for problem list

[Joseph D. Darcy]

Hello,

New iteration of the webrev updated after the Jigsaw integration and 
incorporating the earlier feedback.

     http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~darcy/8151763.1

Thanks,

-Joe

On 3/16/2016 4:52 PM, Joseph D. Darcy wrote:
> Hi Jon,
>
> Noted; I'll make that improvement in the next round.
>
> Thanks for pointing this out,
>
> -Joe
>
> On 3/16/2016 4:50 PM, Jonathan Gibbons wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 03/11/2016 07:28 PM, joe darcy wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> As Jon Gibbons has noted off-list, the problem list entries can 
>>> directly include the bug number associated with the test in 
>>> question, enabling better reporting. This format should be used 
>>> rather than the current convention of putting the bug number in a 
>>> comment.
>>>
>>> Please review the webrev to adopt the revised format for the problem 
>>> list:
>>>
>>>     http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~darcy/8151763.0/
>>>
>>> I've verified jtreg produces the same test list with the old and new 
>>> versions of the problem list.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> -Joe
>>
>>
>> Joe,
>>
>> You can use a comma-separated list when multiple bugs are involved.   
>> The only restriction is,  no embedded whitespace within the list
>>
>>  342 # Also 8080165
>>  343 java/util/Arrays/ParallelPrefix.java   8085982 generic-all
>>
>> can be
>>
>>  343 java/util/Arrays/ParallelPrefix.java   8085982,8080165 generic-all
>>
>>
>> -- Jon
>