RFR: 8151876: (tz) Support tzdata2016c
Roger.Riggs at Oracle.com
Mon Apr 11 14:55:39 UTC 2016
The change to the
just eliminates the test.
Is there an alternate test that the formatter is returning the correct
value for the GMT+/- cases?
On 4/11/2016 6:59 AM, Ramanand Patil wrote:
> Hi all,
> I would like someone from java.time to do a second review for this.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Masayoshi Okutsu
> Sent: Tuesday, April 05, 2016 5:09 AM
> To: Ramanand Patil; i18n-dev at openjdk.java.net
> Cc: core-libs-dev at openjdk.java.net
> Subject: Re: RFR: 8151876: (tz) Support tzdata2016c
> Looks good to me. But I'd like someone from java.time to review the changes to see if it's OK for java.time.
> On 4/4/2016 6:50 PM, Ramanand Patil wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> Please review the latest TZDATA (tzdata2016c) integration to JDK9.
>> Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8151876
>> Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~rpatil/8151876/webrev.00/
>> All the TimeZone related tests are passed after integration.
>> Please note that this patch includes both tzdata2016b and tzdata2016c integration. The tzdata2016b review was abandoned because tzdata2016c was already released.
>> As suggested by Masayoshi, changes are made such that, "GMT+hh:mm" is used for formatting of the newly added TimeZones in tzdata2016b.
>> [This is done to accommodate the IANA's new trial system where the new
>> zones use numeric time zone abbreviations like "+04" instead of
>> invented abbreviations like "ASTT".]
More information about the core-libs-dev