Skip to content

Conversation

@gauthamkrishnanibm
Copy link
Contributor

@gauthamkrishnanibm gauthamkrishnanibm commented Apr 25, 2025

MET timezone entry in TimeZoneNames.java and TimeZoneNames_*.java needs to be updated as MET is alias to Europe/Brussels as per 2024b tzdata changes.

Also Bug4848242.java needs to be removed as the test expects all euro locale time zones should have the same short names.


Progress

  • Change must be properly reviewed (1 review required, with at least 1 Reviewer)
  • Change must not contain extraneous whitespace
  • Commit message must refer to an issue

Issue

  • JDK-8342886: Update MET timezone in TimeZoneNames files (Bug - P4)

Reviewers

Reviewing

Using git

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/24871/head:pull/24871
$ git checkout pull/24871

Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/24871
$ git pull https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/24871/head

Using Skara CLI tools

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 24871

View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 24871

Using diff file

Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/24871.diff

Using Webrev

Link to Webrev Comment

MET timezone entry in TimeZoneNames.java and TimeZoneNames_*.java needs to be updated as MET is alias to Europe/Brussels as per 2024b tzdata changes.

Also Bug4848242.java needs to be removed as the test expects all euro locale time zones should have the same short names.
@bridgekeeper
Copy link

bridgekeeper bot commented Apr 25, 2025

👋 Welcome back gauthamkrishnanibm! 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
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Apr 25, 2025

@gauthamkrishnanibm 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:

8342886: Update MET timezone in TimeZoneNames files

Reviewed-by: naoto

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 74 new commits pushed to 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.

As you do not have Committer status in this project an existing Committer must agree to sponsor your change. Possible candidates are the reviewers of this PR (@naotoj) but any other Committer may sponsor as well.

➡️ To flag this PR as ready for integration with the above commit message, type /integrate in a new comment. (Afterwards, your sponsor types /sponsor in a new comment to perform the integration).

@openjdk openjdk bot added the rfr Pull request is ready for review label Apr 25, 2025
@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Apr 25, 2025

@gauthamkrishnanibm 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
Copy link

mlbridge bot commented Apr 25, 2025

Webrevs

@naotoj
Copy link
Member

naotoj commented Apr 25, 2025

Thanks for the contribution.

Also Bug4848242.java needs to be removed as the test expects all euro locale time zones should have the same short names.

I think this is still worth testing, with comments adjusted (not every euro country, but sampled ones do have the same short names)

Reverting the change to delete Bug4848242.java  as it is still worth testing, with comments adjusted.
@gauthamkrishnanibm
Copy link
Contributor Author

@naotoj Thanks for reviewing. Agreed that the Bug4848242.java is still worth testing, with comments adjusted.
Updated the PR.

Copy link
Member

@naotoj naotoj left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks for bringing back the test case. Please add the bug id 8342886 in the test header.

@gauthamkrishnanibm
Copy link
Contributor Author

@naotoj updated. Thanks

@naotoj
Copy link
Member

naotoj commented Apr 29, 2025

You'll need to append "8342886" to the @bug tag

@gauthamkrishnanibm
Copy link
Contributor Author

@naotoj updated. Thanks

Copy link
Member

@naotoj naotoj left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM. Confirmed T1-T3 tests succeeded in our CI system

@openjdk openjdk bot added the ready Pull request is ready to be integrated label Apr 29, 2025
@gauthamkrishnanibm
Copy link
Contributor Author

/integrate

@openjdk openjdk bot added the sponsor Pull request is ready to be sponsored label Apr 30, 2025
@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Apr 30, 2025

@gauthamkrishnanibm
Your change (at version 30e2c54) is now ready to be sponsored by a Committer.

@naotoj
Copy link
Member

naotoj commented Apr 30, 2025

/sponsor

@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Apr 30, 2025

Going to push as commit 6612281.
Since your change was applied there have been 82 commits pushed to the master branch:

Your commit was automatically rebased without conflicts.

@openjdk openjdk bot added the integrated Pull request has been integrated label Apr 30, 2025
@openjdk openjdk bot closed this Apr 30, 2025
@openjdk openjdk bot removed the ready Pull request is ready to be integrated label Apr 30, 2025
@openjdk openjdk bot removed rfr Pull request is ready for review sponsor Pull request is ready to be sponsored labels Apr 30, 2025
@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Apr 30, 2025

@naotoj @gauthamkrishnanibm Pushed as commit 6612281.

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

@gauthamkrishnanibm gauthamkrishnanibm deleted the JDK-8342886 branch April 30, 2025 20:08
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants