[9] RFR: 8180375: Rename <baseName>Provider to <packagename>.spi.<simpleName>Provider

[Mandy Chung]

Naoto,

The javadoc of getBundle(String, Module) and getBundle(String,Locale,Module) methods also mention the service type “baseName”Provider that needs update as well.

Mandy

> On May 16, 2017, at 2:52 PM, Mandy Chung <mandy.chung at oracle.com> wrote:
> 
> 
>> On May 16, 2017, at 11:14 AM, Naoto Sato <naoto.sato at oracle.com> wrote:
>> 
>> Hello,
>> 
>> Please review the changes to the following issue:
>> 
>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8180375
>> 
>> The proposed fix is located at:
>> 
>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~naoto/8180375/webrev.00/
>> 
>> This is to change the package name of the resource bundle provider to a different one, by appending ".spi" to the original package name. This change effectively avoids possible split package issue if resource bundles are provided from other named modules.
> 
> This would ease migration in particular when the provider modules are loaded in a layer defined to multiple loader.  Existing resource bundles can be kept in the same package.
> 
> 247  * The service type is designated by {@code package name + ".spi." + simple name +"Provider"}. For
> 
> It may be clearer to say {@code <package name> + “.spi.” + <simple name> + “Provider”}.
> 
> 
> test/java/util/ResourceBundle/modules/appbasic/src/test/jdk/test/resources/spi/MyResourcesProviderImpl.java
> test/java/util/ResourceBundle/modules/appbasic2/src/test/jdk/test/resources/spi/MyResourcesProviderImpl.java
>   - they are provider implmentation classes.  They don’t need to be renamed. If you want to rename them, maybe better to move them to jdk.test.resources.internal package.
> 
> test/java/util/ResourceBundle/modules/layer/src/Main.java
> test/java/util/ResourceBundle/modules/layer/src/m1/p/Main.java
>   Nit: several long lines that can be wrapped.
> 
> Otherwise looks fine.
> 
> Mandy