8255533: Incorrect javadoc in DateTimeFormatterBuilder.appendPattern() for 'uu'/'yy'

[naotoj]

Hi,

Please review this simple doc fix in DateTimeFormatterBuilder.appendPattern(). It is missing the value for maxWidth argument.

Naoto

---

Progress

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

Testing

	Linux x64	Linux x86	Windows x64	macOS x64
Build	✔️ (5/5 passed)	✔️ (2/2 passed)	✔️ (2/2 passed)	✔️ (2/2 passed)
Test (tier1)	✔️ (9/9 passed)	✔️ (9/9 passed)	⏳ (1/9 running)	⏳ (1/9 running)

Issue

• JDK-8255533: Incorrect javadoc in DateTimeFormatterBuilder.appendPattern() for 'uu'/'yy'

Reviewers

• Lance Andersen (@LanceAndersen - Reviewer)
• Roger Riggs (@RogerRiggs - Reviewer)

Download

$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk pull/908/head:pull/908
$ git checkout pull/908

[bridgekeeper]

👋 Welcome back naoto! 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]

@naotoj The following labels will be automatically applied to this pull request:

• core-libs
• i18n

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

[mlbridge]

Webrevs

• 00: Full (640b0fb)

[LanceAndersen]

Looks good

[openjdk]

@naotoj 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:

8255533: Incorrect javadoc in DateTimeFormatterBuilder.appendPattern() for 'uu'/'yy'

Reviewed-by: lancea, rriggs

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 8 new commits pushed to the master branch:

• 3f20612: 8255555: Bad copyright headers in SocketChannelCompare.java SocketChannelConnectionSetup.java UnixSocketChannelReadWrite.java
• 42fc158: 8253939: [TESTBUG] Increase coverage of the cgroups detection code
• 01eb690: 8255554: Bad copyright header in AbstractFileSystemProvider.java
• 1215b1a: 8255457: Shenandoah: cleanup ShenandoahMarkTask
• af33e16: 8255441: Cleanup ciEnv/jvmciEnv::lookup_method-s
• 8ad7f38: 8255014: Record Classes javax.lang.model changes, follow-up
• 6bb7e45: 8245194: Unix domain socket channel implementation
• 8bde2f4: 8255013: implement Record Classes as a standard feature in Java, follow-up

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.

[naotoj]

/integrate

[openjdk]

@naotoj Since your change was applied there have been 8 commits pushed to the master branch:

• 3f20612: 8255555: Bad copyright headers in SocketChannelCompare.java SocketChannelConnectionSetup.java UnixSocketChannelReadWrite.java
• 42fc158: 8253939: [TESTBUG] Increase coverage of the cgroups detection code
• 01eb690: 8255554: Bad copyright header in AbstractFileSystemProvider.java
• 1215b1a: 8255457: Shenandoah: cleanup ShenandoahMarkTask
• af33e16: 8255441: Cleanup ciEnv/jvmciEnv::lookup_method-s
• 8ad7f38: 8255014: Record Classes javax.lang.model changes, follow-up
• 6bb7e45: 8245194: Unix domain socket channel implementation
• 8bde2f4: 8255013: implement Record Classes as a standard feature in Java, follow-up

Your commit was automatically rebased without conflicts.

Pushed as commit 790d6e2.

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