JDK-8233160 : Add java.vendor.url.bug to list of recognized standard system properties
Type:Enhancement
Component:core-libs
Sub-Component:java.lang
Priority:P4
Status:Open
Resolution:Unresolved
Submitted:2019-10-29
Updated:2023-09-08
The Version table provides details related to the release that this issue/RFE will be addressed.
Unresolved : Release in which this issue/RFE will be addressed. Resolved: Release in which this issue/RFE has been resolved. Fixed : Release in which this issue/RFE has been fixed. The release containing this fix may be available for download as an Early Access Release or a General Availability Release.
As discussed in the CSR review of JDK-8232753, java.vendor.url.bug has been present as a system property for many releases and it would be reasonable to recognize it as a standard property.
Comments
No objection to having java.vendor.url.bug be non-optional; thanks for checking.
08-09-2023
Thank you Mark for those inputs. I'll draft the CSR accordingly.
01-09-2023
I would make java.vendor.url.bug non-optional, given that it appears to be widely used. java.vendor.version is optional because some vendors use it, while some do not (cf. JDK-8216383).
We’ve never specified java.vendor.url to be a parseable URL, and at this point in time it isn’t something that we’d try to enforce. I suggest treating java.vendor.bug.url the same way, for the same reasons.
01-09-2023
Hello [~darcy], [~mr], I've opened a PR to address this issue https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/15504. As noted in the PR, it's unclear if we should specify this java.vendor.url.bug as an optional property (like what's done for java.vendor.version) or should be this non-optional.
There's also a question on the PR whether this property's value should be a parsable URL. I think it needn't be for the reasons I note in the PR, but I would like to hear your and others inputs before I open a CSR.
01-09-2023
A pull request was submitted for review.
URL: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15504
Date: 2023-08-31 06:53:45 +0000