Make ByteArrayOutputStream.ensureCapacity(int) protected?

[Joseph D. Darcy]

 From the CSR FAQ 
(https://wiki.openjdk.org/spaces/csr/pages/32342047/CSR+FAQs):

> Q: If my change needs a CSR review and a code review, which should I 
> do first?
> A: To take a common case of a Java API change, there is some overlap 
> between the factors considered in a general code review and the 
> factors considered by the CSR when reviewing the specification and 
> compatibility impact. (CSR members often participate in code reviews 
> in addition to their reviews in CSR roles.) An engineer may choose to 
> run the CSR process and code review in parallel, but feedback from 
> either channel may be received which requires updates to the proposal 
> in the other channel. If an engineer chooses to sequence code review 
> and CSR review, to minimize latency the process expected to provide 
> more feedback should be run first.


HTH,

-Joe

On 1/8/2026 1:19 PM, Roger Riggs wrote:
> Hi Daniel,
>
> CSR's get few reviewers than PR's.
>
> A broader review in the PR can improve the prose and get comments on 
> additional use cases.
> For myself, I do them in parallel, putting the initial CSR in proposed 
> state to get early feedback from the CSR review.
> Comments on the PR accumulate and are addressed in the PR and when 
> that settles down, update the PR and finalize.
>
> In the CSR, the Compatibility Risk description highlights a typical 
> more serious risk, that of superseding an existing method in an 
> implementation and possibly changing or being in conflict with its 
> semantics. As a protected method, its potential to be in conflict with 
> existing implementations is reduced somewhat.
>
> The diff in the CSR should focus on the specification change, not the 
> implementation changes unless they affect visible behavior. 
> (Generally, avoid irrelevant information in the CSR).
>
> BTW, P4 is a better priority for this useful addition, P5 is pretty 
> much ignored or trivial and not worth it.
>
> Thanks for the followup, Roger
>
>
> On 1/7/26 4:07 PM, Daniel Gredler wrote:
>> Hi Roger,
>>
>> I've created the CSR here: https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8374739
>>
>> Alan also provided some feedback on the original issue here: 
>> https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8374610
>>
>> I was going to wait to create the PR until the CSR has been approved, 
>> if that's OK?
>>
>> Take care,
>>
>> Daniel
>>
>>