8170539: Test clashes with another test with a similar name

[Alan Bateman]

On 30/11/2016 16:53, Martin Buchholz wrote:

> :
>
> Also, in a case like this where a forest is broken with a fix 
> available, shouldn't there be an emergency client -> dev integration?
>
The jdk9/client -> jdk9/dev integration involve PIT so not doable in 
minutes.

In any case,  I'm surprised that the issue didn't block the original 
jdk9/client -> jdk9/dev integration. Also when the issue was discovered 
then the fix should have been pushed to jdk9/dev and pulled down to 
jdk9/client.

-Alan