RFR: Added section for newcomers [v8]

[Stuart Marks]

On Thu, 3 Dec 2020 14:29:32 GMT, Jesper Wilhelmsson <jwilhelm at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> String::getFronglified would be a new API, best to get agreement on the mailing list before proposing a patch. It's very possible that the API has been discussed and rejected many times or it has interactions with many other areas of the platform. To some extent we have a bit of a cultural clash here in that many developers are used to "code first" and use the PR to start the discussion. For new standard or JDK-specific APIs, this might be the first 1% of the work.
>
> I tend to agree with Magnus here. Don't we want to cover changes that removes a part of the API or just changes the behavior of some method?

I think "any API change" is preferable to "new API" -- I could easily imagine somebody coming along and saying, "All I want to do is to have this method return null instead of throwing NPE. That's not a new API." There's a larger discussion to be had somewhere else about what constitutes an API change, in particular that some behavior changes *are* API changes. Meanwhile "any API change" is probably sufficiently inclusive for now.

-------------

PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/guide/pull/38