Bugzilla – Full Text Bug Listing
| Summary: | Internal packages have not been marked x-internal | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [WebTools] Java Server Faces | Reporter: | Cameron Bateman <cameron.bateman> | ||||
| Component: | Core | Assignee: | Cameron Bateman <cameron.bateman> | ||||
| Status: | RESOLVED FIXED | QA Contact: | |||||
| Severity: | normal | ||||||
| Priority: | P3 | CC: | david_williams, kaloyan, neil.hauge, raghunathan.srinivasan | ||||
| Version: | 3.2 | Flags: | david_williams:
pmc_approved+
raghunathan.srinivasan: pmc_approved? (naci.dai) raghunathan.srinivasan: pmc_approved? (deboer) neil.hauge: pmc_approved+ kaloyan: pmc_approved+ raghunathan.srinivasan: review+ |
||||
| Target Milestone: | 3.2 RC4 | ||||||
| Hardware: | PC | ||||||
| OS: | Windows XP | ||||||
| Whiteboard: | PMC_approved | ||||||
| Attachments: |
|
||||||
Please review for RC4. This is a low-risk, non-code affecting change. * Explain why you believe this is a stop-ship defect. Or, if it is a "hotbug" (requested by an adopter) please document it as such. This bug inadvertently promotes code in an 'internal' package as public API. These should be marked x-internal to avoid confusion * Is there a work-around? If so, why do you believe the work-around is insufficient? No workaround * How has the fix been tested? Is there a test case attached to the bugzilla record? Has a JUnit Test been added? Code review. * Give a brief technical overview. Who has reviewed this fix? See description * What is the risk associated with this fix? none I think we can count this as "documentation". Please do use care when releasing. This is especially important, I think, if/when someone tries to use the "API Tools" from PDE to see if they are using non-API. Patch applied to HEAD (M4). |
Created attachment 171040 [details] Make affected packages x-internal The packages in the patch are in existing "internal" folder and were mistakenly not marked x-internal:=true explicitly. This this needs to be done to avoid confusion.