8271161: [BACKOUT] JDK-8249634 doclint should report implicit constructor as missing javadoc comments

[dcubed-ojdk]

This reverts commit c1c4048.

---

Progress

• Change must not contain extraneous whitespace
• Commit message must refer to an issue
• Change must be properly reviewed

Issue

• JDK-8271161: [BACKOUT] JDK-8249634 doclint should report implicit constructor as missing javadoc comments

Reviewers

• Igor Ignatyev (@iignatev - Reviewer)

Reviewing

Using git

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk pull/4880/head:pull/4880
$ git checkout pull/4880

Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/4880
$ git pull https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk pull/4880/head

Using Skara CLI tools

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 4880

View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 4880

Using diff file

Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/4880.diff

[bridgekeeper]

👋 Welcome back dcubed! 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.

[dcubed-ojdk]

/label add compiler
/label add javadoc

[openjdk]

@dcubed-ojdk
The compiler label was successfully added.

[openjdk]

@dcubed-ojdk
The javadoc label was successfully added.

[mlbridge]

Webrevs

• 00: Full (6af9c9fc)

[dcubed-ojdk]

The Mach5 Tier1 job has PASSed.

[openjdk]

@dcubed-ojdk 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:

8271161: [BACKOUT] JDK-8249634 doclint should report implicit constructor as missing javadoc comments

Reviewed-by: iignatyev

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 1 new commit pushed to the master branch:

• 1362e09: 8211002: test/jdk/java/lang/Math/PowTests.java skips testing for non-corner-case values

Please see this link for an up-to-date comparison between the source branch of this pull request and the master branch.
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.

➡️ To integrate this PR with the above commit message to the master branch, type /integrate in a new comment.

[mlbridge]

Mailing list message from Joseph D. Darcy on compiler-dev:

If there is only one test failing, I'd rather the single test be problem
listed rather than the patch being backed out.

Thanks,

-Joe

On 7/22/2021 1:57 PM, Igor Ignatyev wrote:

[pavelrappo]

I think I know where the problem is: a hardcoded file separator, which is system dependent. Did the original patch for 8249634 fail on a Windows machine?

[dcubed-ojdk]

The fix for:

JDK-8249634 doclint should report implicit constructor as missing javadoc comments

failed on every OS in Mach5 Tier1. Not just Windows. This patch was clearly
not properly tested before being integrated. A [BACKOUT] is appropriate in
this situation.

[dcubed-ojdk]

@jonathan-gibbons has said that he is okay with a [BACKOUT] or a ProblemListing.
The [BACKOUT] is tested and ready so I'm going with it.

/integrate

[openjdk]

Going to push as commit 9b93d81.
Since your change was applied there has been 1 commit pushed to the master branch:

• 1362e09: 8211002: test/jdk/java/lang/Math/PowTests.java skips testing for non-corner-case values

Your commit was automatically rebased without conflicts.

[openjdk]

@dcubed-ojdk Pushed as commit 9b93d81.

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

[pavelrappo]

This patch was clearly not properly tested before being integrated.

It seems that the patch was integrated without prior synchronization with the mainline, which had diverged in the relevant areas since the patch was last updated.

And no, it seems that the failure has nothing to do with the file separator. Sorry for the noise.