From y.umaoka at gmail.com  Mon Nov 15 09:33:51 2010
From: y.umaoka at gmail.com (Yoshito Umaoka)
Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2010 12:33:51 -0500
Subject: [loc-en-dev] Backward compatibility problem in LocaleNameProvider
Message-ID: <4CE16EFF.1060208@gmail.com>

Hi all,

I realized that java.util.spi.LocaleNameProvider#getDisplayScript was 
added as an abstract method. I thought I could not make it abstract, but 
obviously I forgot about it. For now, because of this, existing 
LocaleNameProvider implementations cause compilation failure (because of 
lack of getDisplayScript. We should remove the keyword "abstract" and 
provide the default implementation (return null) to fix the backward 
compatibility problem.

-Yoshito

From naoto.sato at oracle.com  Mon Nov 15 10:40:12 2010
From: naoto.sato at oracle.com (Naoto Sato)
Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2010 10:40:12 -0800
Subject: [loc-en-dev] Backward compatibility problem in
	LocaleNameProvider
In-Reply-To: <4CE16EFF.1060208@gmail.com>
References: <4CE16EFF.1060208@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4CE17E8C.5090900@oracle.com>

Filed a bug 7000136 for this.

Naoto

(11/15/10 9:33 AM), Yoshito Umaoka wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I realized that java.util.spi.LocaleNameProvider#getDisplayScript was
> added as an abstract method. I thought I could not make it abstract, but
> obviously I forgot about it. For now, because of this, existing
> LocaleNameProvider implementations cause compilation failure (because of
> lack of getDisplayScript. We should remove the keyword "abstract" and
> provide the default implementation (return null) to fix the backward
> compatibility problem.
>
> -Yoshito