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

8252897: Minor .jcheck/conf update #70

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

@rwestberg
Copy link
Member

@rwestberg rwestberg commented Sep 8, 2020

The initial version of the Skara-formatted jcheck configuration file contained a small error, this change corrects it.

Best regards,
Robin


Progress

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

Issue

Reviewers

Download

$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk pull/70/head:pull/70
$ git checkout pull/70

@bridgekeeper
Copy link

@bridgekeeper bridgekeeper bot commented Sep 8, 2020

👋 Welcome back rwestberg! 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.

Loading

@openjdk openjdk bot changed the title 8252897 8252897: Minor .jcheck/conf update Sep 8, 2020
@openjdk openjdk bot added the rfr label Sep 8, 2020
@openjdk
Copy link

@openjdk openjdk bot commented Sep 8, 2020

@rwestberg The following label will be automatically applied to this pull request: build.

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 (add|remove) "label" command.

Loading

@openjdk openjdk bot added the build label Sep 8, 2020
@mlbridge
Copy link

@mlbridge mlbridge bot commented Sep 8, 2020

Webrevs

Loading

edvbld
edvbld approved these changes Sep 8, 2020
Copy link
Member

@edvbld edvbld left a comment

Looks good, thanks for fixing!

Loading

@openjdk
Copy link

@openjdk openjdk bot commented Sep 8, 2020

@rwestberg This change now passes all automated pre-integration checks. In addition to the automated checks, the change must also fulfill all project specific requirements

After integration, the commit message will be:

8252897: Minor .jcheck/conf update

Reviewed-by: ehelin
  • If you would like to add a summary, use the /summary command.
  • To credit additional contributors, use the /contributor command.
  • To add additional solved issues, use the /issue command.

Since the source branch of this PR was last updated there has been 1 commit pushed to the master branch:

  • 7600274: 8252859: Inconsistent use of alpha in class AbsSeq

As there are no conflicts, your changes will automatically be rebased on top of these commits when integrating. If you prefer to avoid automatic rebasing, please merge master into your branch, and then specify the current head hash when integrating, like this: /integrate 76002747d5617bf63de39c5ed07ecbcc064e9c21.

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

Loading

@openjdk openjdk bot added the ready label Sep 8, 2020
@rwestberg
Copy link
Member Author

@rwestberg rwestberg commented Sep 8, 2020

Thanks for reviewing Erik! As this problem affects other pull requests, I'm going to integrate it right away.

Loading

@rwestberg
Copy link
Member Author

@rwestberg rwestberg commented Sep 8, 2020

/integrate

Loading

@openjdk openjdk bot closed this Sep 8, 2020
@openjdk openjdk bot added integrated and removed ready rfr labels Sep 8, 2020
@openjdk
Copy link

@openjdk openjdk bot commented Sep 8, 2020

@rwestberg Since your change was applied there has been 1 commit pushed to the master branch:

  • 7600274: 8252859: Inconsistent use of alpha in class AbsSeq

Your commit was automatically rebased without conflicts.

Pushed as commit bf5da0c.

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

Loading

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
2 participants