[7u10] Request for approval: 7166055: Javadoc for WeakHashMap contains misleading advice

[David Holmes]

On 16/09/2012 1:26 AM, Phil Race wrote:
> On 9/15/12 3:46 AM, David Holmes wrote:
>> Phil,
>>
>> On 15/09/2012 2:57 AM, Phil Race wrote:
>>> I really don't think its appropriate to push javadoc changes into an
>>> update release without
>>> a really, really compelling reason that I don't see here.
>>
>> That is certainly true if they represent a specification change, but
>> there is no semantic change here this is a simple clarification.
>
> That would just rule it out completely. But we don't even regenerate
> javadoc for
> the update releases and we have never randomly backported doc comments, for
> no obvious reason. So my reasoning and position stands.

This is OpenJDK, it doesn't matter if "we" don't regenerate javadoc for 
update releases. And I have long thought that "we" should! I understand 
the issue with spec changes in update releases but I never understood a 
policy that would allow errors, misconceptions and mis-guidance to be 
set in stone instead of correcting them for the benefit of the user 
community.

David

> -phil.
>
>>
>> David
>> ------
>>
>>> A reminder: Update releases aren't a free-for-all. You need to exercise
>>> judgement in what
>>> has to go in and what is the case for it. We are up to 7u10 now. We need
>>> to be dialling
>>> back the rate of change and focusing on JDK 8.
>>>
>>> -phil.
>>>
>>>
>>> On 9/14/2012 12:56 AM, Shi Jun Zhang wrote:
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> I'd like to request for approval to push the following change into
>>>> 7u10.
>>>>
>>>> Changeset in jdk8
>>>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8/tl/jdk/rev/237e27c7ddc3
>>>>
>>>> Webrev
>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~zhangshj/jdk7u/7166055/webrev.00/
>>>>
>>>> Reviewed by dholmes, mduigou
>>>>
>>>> Review thread
>>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2012-May/010322.html
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>