[8] Request for review: 8005414: Removing fix for JDK-6500133

[Sean Mullan]

Looks fine to me. I can push it for you.

--Sean

On 01/14/2013 07:06 PM, Jason Uh wrote:
> Sorry, please refer to the following webrev instead:
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~juh/8005414/webrev.02/ (Removed @bug tag as
> this is no longer fixing 6500133).
>
> On 01/14/2013 03:41 PM, Jason Uh wrote:
>> Thanks for your suggestions. I suppose there's no reason to restore the
>> old test, so here's an updated webrev with my test adjusted for the new
>> expected behavior:
>>
>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~juh/8005414/webrev.01/
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Jason
>>
>> On 01/14/2013 02:29 PM, Jason Uh wrote:
>>> There used to be a unit test in the closed workspace for this case that
>>> was removed when the fix for 6500133 was introduced.
>>>
>>> That test and its certificate will be restored.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Jason
>>>
>>> On 01/14/2013 02:18 PM, Sean Mullan wrote:
>>>> On 01/14/2013 05:00 PM, Bernd Eckenfels wrote:
>>>>> Am 14.01.2013, 22:52 Uhr, schrieb Sean Mullan
>>>>> <sean.mullan at oracle.com>:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Looks good to me.
>>>>>
>>>>> The patch removes all unit tests for this class it seems. There
>>>>> should be
>>>>> one parseable URL and if you intent to reject illegal content you can
>>>>> use
>>>>> the test vectors to test for the expected exception.
>>>>
>>>> Good point. Jason, can you keep the test but readjust to test for an
>>>> expected exception?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Sean