RFR 8170900: Issue with FilePermission::implies for wildcard flag(-)

[Xuelei Fan]

I think the note is an example, may not need an additional CCC.

For easier reading, I may use a contrast example.  For example, "Note 
that this means "/-" implies "/foo" but not "foo".".

Use the one you like, I'm OK with the either.

Xuelei

On 12/21/2016 3:58 PM, Wang Weijun wrote:
>
>> On Dec 22, 2016, at 4:39 AM, Xuelei Fan <xuelei.fan at oracle.com> wrote:
>>
>> I'm trying to understand this update.  Does "/-" imply "/foo"?
>
> Yes.
>
>>
>> Does the following spec can be used to explain the new added note?
>>
>>     *     <li>if the wildcard flag is "-", the simple pathname's path
>>     *     must be recursively inside the wildcard pathname's path.
>
> Yes.
>
> But the precise meaning of "recursively inside" is different between the pre-jdk9 and jdk9 behaviors. The @implNote explains more.
>
> --Max
>
>>
>> Xuelei
>>
>> On 12/19/2016 11:25 PM, Wang Weijun wrote:
>>> Ping again.
>>>
>>>> On Dec 14, 2016, at 1:53 PM, Wang Weijun <weijun.wang at oracle.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> An clarification is added to FilePermission::implies:
>>>>
>>>>     * @implNote
>>>>       ....
>>>>     * a simple {@code npath} is recursively inside a wildcard {@code npath}
>>>>     * if and only if {@code simple_npath.relativize(wildcard_npath)}
>>>> -     * is a series of one or more "..". An invalid {@code FilePermission} does
>>>> +     * is a series of one or more "..". Note that this means "/-" does not
>>>> +     * imply "foo". An invalid {@code FilePermission} does
>>>>     * not imply any object except for itself.
>>>>
>>>> The newly added sentence is
>>>>
>>>> Note that this means "/-" does not imply "foo".
>>>>
>>>> JCK has agreed to update their test.
>>>>
>>>> Since this is just a clarification inside an @implNote and no spec is updated, I suppose no CCC is needed. Please confirm.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks
>>>> Max
>>>>
>>>
>