Code review request for 4891262 "API spec, javax/accessibility: few invalid javadoc tags"

[Andrew John Hughes]

2009/12/15 Joseph D. Darcy <Joe.Darcy at sun.com>:
> Andrew John Hughes wrote:
>>
>> 2009/12/10 Joseph D. Darcy <Joe.Darcy at sun.com>:
>>
>>>
>>> Andrew John Hughes wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> 2009/12/10 Joseph D. Darcy <Joe.Darcy at sun.com>:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Andrew John Hughes wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2009/12/10 Joe Darcy <Joe.Darcy at sun.com>:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hello.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> While doing a coredocs build, I noticed once again some javadoc
>>>>>>> warnings
>>>>>>> coming out of the javax.accessibility package and I decided to fix
>>>>>>> them;
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> patch is below and the full webrev is at
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~darcy/4891262.0/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Again, good to see these being fixed.  What do you think to the idea
>>>>>> of backporting these fixes to OpenJDK6 for the next release (b19)?
>>>>>> It's not a major issue, but would improve the documentation packages
>>>>>> being installed by GNU/Linux distros.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Andrew, if you wish, you have my approval to apply the fix for 4891262
>>>>> (just
>>>>> pushed into JDK 7 TL) and also
>>>>>
>>>>> 6909070 "Missing package statements in java.text.Bidi @see links"
>>>>>
>>>>> to OpenJDK 6 build 18, the current build.
>>>>>
>>>>> -Joe
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks.  I'll do that once I get the current timezone patch off my
>>>> stack.  I suggest we leave a full blitz of such warnings until b19
>>>> though, otherwise b18 has the potential to go on for ever :)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Build 19 would be fine too, but at least for now there will be at most
>>> one
>>> or two more doc warnings patches from me in the near future :-)
>>>
>>> -Joe
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Moving discussion to jdk6-dev as it concerns OpenJDK6 primarily.
>>
>> My hesitation was because I didn't think the baseline was as good for
>> OpenJDK6 as OpenJDK7 because a number of earlier patches were never
>> backported.
>>
>> I did a build and that is the case; there are a lot of javadoc
>> warnings that are fixed in 7 and thus there are changesets to
>> backport.
>>
>> The first fix is
>>
>> 6810915: Sun proprietary warnings in JDK build
>> Reviewed-by: ohair
>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~andrew/6810915/webrev.01/
>>
>> which cuts down significantly on the 1789 warnings currently produced
>> by turning off the 'warning: sun.a\
>> wt.SunHints is Sun proprietary API and may be removed in a future
>> release; style warnings.
>>
>> Ok to push?
>>
>
> Yes; approved to go back.
>
> -Joe
>

Two more:

changeset:   1624:f1eb4c28b313
user:        lancea
date:        Wed Sep 09 20:15:22 2009 -0400
summary:     6737212: Fixed javadoc warning messages in RowSet classes
http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk7/tl/jdk/rev/f1eb4c28b313

changeset:   1969:3267ca7afe95
user:        darcy
date:        Fri Dec 11 10:40:14 2009 -0800
summary:     6909563: Javadoc build warnings in rmi, security, management
http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk7/tl/jdk/rev/3267ca7afe95

Ok to go back?
-- 
Andrew :-)

Free Java Software Engineer
Red Hat, Inc. (http://www.redhat.com)

Support Free Java!
Contribute to GNU Classpath and the OpenJDK
http://www.gnu.org/software/classpath
http://openjdk.java.net

PGP Key: 94EFD9D8 (http://subkeys.pgp.net)
Fingerprint: F8EF F1EA 401E 2E60 15FA  7927 142C 2591 94EF D9D8