[8u] Request for enhancement backport approval for CR JDK-8171194: Exception "Duplicate field name&signature in class file" should report the name and signature of the field

[Seán Coffey]

David,

I think Shafi should iron out his plans for JDK 9 inclusion before 
getting to a JDK 8u request then. We need to start looking at plans 
around how JDK 9 fixes occur post JDK 9 GA. JDK 9 RFEs are still 
possible via an approved process but I'm aware that JDK 9 will start to 
close down on contributions given that GA is approaching.

Regards,
Sean.

On 15/03/17 10:07, David Holmes wrote:
> Hi Sean,
>
> On 15/03/2017 7:32 PM, Seán Coffey wrote:
>> Hi Shafi,
>>
>> Your request has been logged and I'll update you once a decision has
>> been reached.
>>
>> If this was for porting, you should have pushed the original change to
>> jdk9 and not jdk10. This has already been widely communicated on the
>> jdk10 OpenJDK mailing list.
>
> I assume you are referring to:
>
> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk10-dev/2017-March/000105.html
>
> But 9 is closed for RFEs so that is not a possible workflow here.
>
> David
> -----
>
>> regards,
>> Sean.
>>
>>
>> On 15/03/2017 05:01, Shafi Ahmad wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> May I get the approval of enhancement backport of 'JDK-8171194:
>>> Exception "Duplicate field name&signature in class file" should report
>>> the name and signature of the field' to jdk8u-dev.
>>>
>>> Jdk10 bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8171194
>>>
>>> "java.lang.ClassFormatError: Duplicate field name&signature in class
>>> file CampaignClient"
>>>
>>>  From the above Exception message, there is no easy way of knowing
>>> what is triggering the problem.
>>> If the class in question is quite big so removing code by trial and
>>> error is very time consuming.
>>>
>>> With field name + signature, pinpointing the actual problematic code
>>> will be easy and time saving.
>>>
>>> I have tested it with the jprt and jtreg tests.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Shafi
>>>
>>