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

8297437: javadoc cannot link to old docs (with old style anchors) #12066

Closed
wants to merge 2 commits into from

Conversation

wkia
Copy link

@wkia wkia commented Jan 18, 2023

As it discussed on the mail list, checking presence of "element-list" or "package-list" is good enough approach to determine which type of anchors is used in external docs. The fix is for docs generated by 'supported' platforms only, i.e. 8, 11, ...

This fix extends Extern.Item with useOldFormId boolean flag to indicate a type of anchor. The boolean flag is set accordingly when reading a list of elements from either "element-list" or "package-list".

Name transformation is performed in Extern.getExternalLink() by getOldFormHtmlName() call when creating DocLink instance.

Type of anchors used by platform docs are hard-coded in isOldFormPlatformDocs() (similar to getPlatformElementList()), since it's not supposed to rebuild platform docs on docs.oracle.com.


Progress

  • Change must be properly reviewed (1 review required, with at least 1 Reviewer)
  • Change must not contain extraneous whitespace
  • Commit message must refer to an issue

Issue

  • JDK-8297437: javadoc cannot link to old docs (with old style anchors)

Reviewers

Reviewing

Using git

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk pull/12066/head:pull/12066
$ git checkout pull/12066

Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/12066
$ git pull https://git.openjdk.org/jdk pull/12066/head

Using Skara CLI tools

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 12066

View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 12066

Using diff file

Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/12066.diff

@bridgekeeper
Copy link

bridgekeeper bot commented Jan 18, 2023

👋 Welcome back rmarchenko! A progress list of the required criteria for merging this PR into master will be added to the body of your pull request. There are additional pull request commands available for use with this pull request.

@openjdk openjdk bot added the rfr Pull request is ready for review label Jan 18, 2023
@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Jan 18, 2023

@wkia The following label will be automatically applied to this pull request:

  • javadoc

When this pull request is ready to be reviewed, an "RFR" email will be sent to the corresponding mailing list. If you would like to change these labels, use the /label pull request command.

@openjdk openjdk bot added the javadoc javadoc-dev@openjdk.org label Jan 18, 2023
@mlbridge
Copy link

mlbridge bot commented Jan 18, 2023

Webrevs

Copy link
Member

@hns hns left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This looks good to me. A few minor issues:

  • The year in the copyright headers of modified files should be updated to 2023
  • The bug id should be added to the @bug field of tests that have been significantly changed (I think only TestLinkPlatform.java in this case)
  • I wonder if for those tests that are hard-coded to release 8 we should add tests for release >= 10?

@wkia
Copy link
Author

wkia commented Jan 25, 2023

@hns

  • I wonder if for those tests that are hard-coded to release 8 we should add tests for release >= 10?

I'm not sure about it.
TestLinkPlatform seems OK now, it covers both cases, but doesn't check 'element-list' file existance. Other changed tests are affected because of they use 'package-list' file in the folder specified by '-linkoffline' option, not because of 'source 8'. There are some javadoc tests which use 'element-list' file currently, but they don't check anchor names. To make sure we check both cases, in a part of the affected tests we could use 'element-list' file instead, so we could cover both cases.

Copy link
Member

@hns hns left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks for the update, looks good!

@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Jan 25, 2023

@wkia This change now passes all automated pre-integration checks.

ℹ️ This project also has non-automated pre-integration requirements. Please see the file CONTRIBUTING.md for details.

After integration, the commit message for the final commit will be:

8297437: javadoc cannot link to old docs (with old style anchors)

Reviewed-by: hannesw

You can use pull request commands such as /summary, /contributor and /issue to adjust it as needed.

At the time when this comment was updated there had been 196 new commits pushed to the master branch:

  • edf1e1a: 8300592: ASan build does not correctly propagate options to some test launchers
  • e80b5ea: 8299635: Hotspot update for deprecated sprintf in Xcode 14
  • f279c75: 8300805: Update autoconf build-aux files with latest from 2022-09-17
  • a23ff63: 8301086: jdk/internal/util/ByteArray/ReadWriteValues.java fails with CompilationError
  • 61775c8: 8300997: Add curl support to createJMHBundle.sh
  • 8a47429: 8295944: Move the Http2TestServer and related classes into a package of its own
  • c8ad600: 8301004: httpclient: Add more debug to HttpResponseInputStream
  • 74e1a8b: 8300236: Use VarHandle access in Data(Input | Output)Stream classes
  • a5d8e12: 8300244: Replace NULL with nullptr in share/interpreter/
  • 71107f4: 8300651: Replace NULL with nullptr in share/runtime/
  • ... and 186 more: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/compare/12edd6f922195f193659814d6c37c361c83e6797...master

As there are no conflicts, your changes will automatically be rebased on top of these commits when integrating. If you prefer to avoid this automatic rebasing, please check the documentation for the /integrate command for further details.

As you do not have Committer status in this project an existing Committer must agree to sponsor your change. Possible candidates are the reviewers of this PR (@hns) but any other Committer may sponsor as well.

➡️ To flag this PR as ready for integration with the above commit message, type /integrate in a new comment. (Afterwards, your sponsor types /sponsor in a new comment to perform the integration).

@openjdk openjdk bot added the ready Pull request is ready to be integrated label Jan 25, 2023
@hns
Copy link
Member

hns commented Jan 25, 2023

I can sponsor this PR.

@wkia
Copy link
Author

wkia commented Jan 25, 2023

/integrate

@openjdk openjdk bot added the sponsor Pull request is ready to be sponsored label Jan 25, 2023
@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Jan 25, 2023

@wkia
Your change (at version 224c5ef) is now ready to be sponsored by a Committer.

@hns
Copy link
Member

hns commented Jan 26, 2023

/sponsor

@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Jan 26, 2023

Going to push as commit 15a1488.
Since your change was applied there have been 208 commits pushed to the master branch:

  • b0376a5: 8301069: Replace NULL with nullptr in share/libadt/
  • 7328182: 8300958: Parallel: Remove unused MutableNUMASpace::capacity_in_words
  • 30cb305: 8292170: Convert CodeRootSetTable to use ResourceHashtable
  • 3589b80: 8300127: Serial: Remove unnecessary from-space iteration in DefNewGeneration::oop_since_save_marks_iterate
  • 48152ef: 8287134: HttpURLConnection chunked streaming mode doesn't enforce specified size
  • 4b0e656: 8298118: split-if optimization causes empty loop to temporarily have more than one phi
  • 252621d: 8301063: Remove dead code from GrowableArray
  • b5a4744: 8300857: State return value for Types.asElement(NoType) explicitly
  • 7e951f4: 8301092: Add benchmark for CRC32
  • adcfd25: 8301098: Remove dead code FileMapInfo::stop_sharing_and_unmap()
  • ... and 198 more: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/compare/12edd6f922195f193659814d6c37c361c83e6797...master

Your commit was automatically rebased without conflicts.

@openjdk openjdk bot added the integrated Pull request has been integrated label Jan 26, 2023
@openjdk openjdk bot closed this Jan 26, 2023
@openjdk openjdk bot removed ready Pull request is ready to be integrated rfr Pull request is ready for review sponsor Pull request is ready to be sponsored labels Jan 26, 2023
@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Jan 26, 2023

@hns @wkia Pushed as commit 15a1488.

💡 You may see a message that your pull request was closed with unmerged commits. This can be safely ignored.

@wkia wkia deleted the another-fix-8297437 branch February 6, 2023 06:39
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
integrated Pull request has been integrated javadoc javadoc-dev@openjdk.org
2 participants