RFR: 8044740: Convert all JDK versions used in @since tag to 1.n[.n] in jdk repo

[Henry Jen]

Thanks for all reviewing and feedbacks on core-libs-dev[1], I tried to 
respond to feedbacks with this email and send off to other mailing lists.

I am wondering if jdk9-dev is the appropriate list for such a trivious 
but broad change, so that we can have one instead of many lists, and we 
still probably miss another. Lets follow up this thread on jdk9-dev.

Regarding to whether we should keep JDK, the later convention is 1.#, 
and as David pointed out the document also list @since that way, I think 
we should settle on that.

For other standards such as SAX or JCE, I propose to convert them to the 
version of JDK those APIs are included. To retain that information, we 
can introduce a custom tag, perhaps @standard or @conformingTo?

@conformingTo <Standard name> <version>[, <Standard name> <version>]*
For example, @conformingTo SAX 2.0.

Repo wise, I think it's best if I can commit to jdk9/dev as a single 
commit instead of scattering to dev and client. But I can cope if this 
is absolutely necessary.

Some changes to implementation classes, as I mentioned, only when it is 
straightforward. Essentially, I did a s/(@since *)JDK(.*)/\1\2 against 
all files.

Some changes not obvious are simply remove tailing space, a (positive) 
side effect of the tools I use so I kept them.

Cheers,
Henry


[1] 
http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2014-June/027113.html

On 06/03/2014 06:22 PM, Henry Jen wrote:
> Hi,
>
> In an effort to determine APIs availability in a given version, it
> became obvious that a consistent way to express @since tag would be
> beneficial.
>
> So started with the most obvious ones, where we have various expression
> for JDK version, this webrev make sure we use @since 1.n[.n] for JDK
> versions.
>
> The main focus is on public APIs, private ones are taken care if it is
> straightforward, otherwise, we try to keep the information.
>
> Some public APIs are using @since <STANDARD> <standard version> format,
> they are also preserved for now, but I think it worth discussion whether
> we want to change to the version as included in J2SE.
>
> There are APIs without @since information, separate webrevs will be
> coming to complete those information.
>
> Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8044740
> The webrev can be found at
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~henryjen/jdk9/8044740/0/webrev
>
> but it's probably easier just look into the raw diff,
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~henryjen/jdk9/8044740/0/webrev/jdk.changeset
>
> Cheers,
> Henry