Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Actually use Java7ClassValue when using Java 7+. #1616

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Apr 16, 2014

Conversation

Projects
None yet
4 participants
@cky
Copy link
Contributor

cky commented Apr 9, 2014

When f5850a5 was created, the org.jruby.java.proxies.ClassValueProxyCache class was renamed as org.jruby.util.collections.Java7ClassValue. But that class was only referenced via reflection, and so IDE-based refactoring did not catch it, and Java7ClassValue ended up being totally unused.

headius added a commit that referenced this pull request Apr 16, 2014

Merge pull request #1616 from cky/actually-use-Java7ClassValue
Actually use Java7ClassValue when using Java 7+.

@headius headius merged commit 5ec626b into jruby:master Apr 16, 2014

1 check failed

continuous-integration/travis-ci The Travis CI build could not complete due to an error
Details
@headius

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

headius commented Apr 16, 2014

Thanks!

@headius headius added this to the JRuby 9000 milestone Apr 16, 2014

@atambo

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

atambo commented Apr 16, 2014

This should be included into jruby-1_7 branch as well, right?

@cky cky deleted the cky:actually-use-Java7ClassValue branch Apr 16, 2014

@cky

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

cky commented Apr 16, 2014

@atambo Yeah, I didn't know which branch I should use as a base when doing pull requests. I know that @enebo does cherry-pick commits into jruby-1_7, but I guess in future, I should just use that branch as the base for pull requests.

@enebo

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

enebo commented Apr 16, 2014

@cky jruby-1_7 is preferred for 1.8, 1.9+ compat fixes and other non-risky backwards compatible changes. If there is any risk or if public signatures change then master is a better place. It sounds like this could have went to jruby-1_7 as well. Don't sweat it though we are used to moving stuff around across branches...

@atambo

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

atambo commented Apr 19, 2014

I cherry-picked it to jruby-1_7 here: f1d3620

@atambo atambo modified the milestones: JRuby 1.7.13, JRuby 9000 Apr 19, 2014

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
You can’t perform that action at this time.