You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@harmony.apache.org by Geir Magnusson Jr <ge...@pobox.com> on 2006/02/09 01:31:10 UTC
[classlib] security2 -> security
Unless I hear massive bellowing in opposition, I'm going to move
security -> security_orig and security2 -> security sometime tomorrow.
Please register protests now...
geir
Re: [classlib] security2 -> security
Posted by Tim Ellison <t....@gmail.com>.
+1
Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
> So it's javadoc.
>
> I vote that we :
>
> - take security up and outside of modules/ to a archive/ directory for now
> - move security2->security
> - over time, start migrating javadoc
>
>
>
> Mikhail Loenko wrote:
>> I've reviewed exception classes:
>>
>> General:
>> security has javadocs that reword SUN's spec, while sec2 does not have
>> security seems to follow 1.4 spec, while sec2 - 1.5
>>
>> AccessControlException
>> - almost no difference. permission field is private in s2 and
>> package-vis in sec
>>
>> PrivilegedActionException
>> - almost the same. the difference is in toString()
>>
>> DigestException,
>> GeneralSecurityException
>> InvalidAlgorithmParameterException
>> InvalidKeyException
>> KeyException
>> NoSuchAlgorithmException
>> SignatureException
>> cert/CertificateEncodingException
>> cert/CertificateException
>> cert/CertificateParsingException
>> cert/CRLException
>> - sec misses two constructors (new in 1.5) and serialVersionUID. sec2
>> has them.
>>
>> InvalidParameterException
>> NoSuchProviderException
>> cert/CertificateExpiredException
>> cert/CertificateNotYetValidException
>> - sec misses serialVersionUID. sec2 has it.
>>
>>
>> KeyManagementException
>> KeyStoreException
>> ProviderException
>> UnrecoverableEntryException
>> UnrecoverableKeyException
>> acl/*
>> spec/*
>> cert/CertStoreException
>> cert/CertPathBuilderException
>> cert/CertPathValidatorException
>> - present in security2 only
>>
>> The question is: are we going to take javadocs?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Mikhail
>>
>> On 2/9/06, Mikhail Loenko <ml...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> I'm going to walk method by method, compare and present results starting
>>> with the easiest cases.
>>>
>>> I've already taken some look at security so I think it would not be
>>> very difficult -
>>> it has 50+ classes, ~20 of them are exceptions, there are some
>>> interfaces...
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Mikhail
>>>
>>> On 2/9/06, Geir Magnusson Jr <ge...@pobox.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Tim Ellison wrote:
>>>>> +1 to consolidating on a single security module.
>>>>> I'm also interested to hear what merging Mikhail has in mind.
>>>>>
>>>>> I was led to believe that security2 was a proper superset of security,
>>>>> so we should be able to do a 'big bang' switch. The security_orig
>>>>> won't
>>>>> be too far away if we need to pull something in. (Perhaps move it out
>>>>> of trunk/modules/ to avoid confusion?)
>>>> Right - it will live forever in SVN, and of course we always can "copy
>>>> forward" in time if we need to - i.e. copy from some past rev into
>>>> "now", whenever that is.
>>>>
>>>> I just don't want to lose anything useful that may be in security...
>>>>
>>>> geir
>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Tim
>>>>>
>>>>> Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
>>>>>> Before you do that...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What are you thinking as your approach?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> geir
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Mikhail Loenko wrote:
>>>>>>> I suggest merging these two bundles. I can do this and provide a
>>>>>>> patch...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>> Mikhail
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 2/9/06, Mikhail Loenko <ml...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> security classes are a subset of security2 classes.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> security2 is 1.5-ready while security has javadocs. What do you
>>>>>>>> mean
>>>>>>>> by 'better'?
>>>>>>>> Are there any original approaches or efficient algorithms used in
>>>>>>>> security?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>> Mikhail
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 2/9/06, Geir Magnusson Jr <ge...@pobox.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Hm. I thought security was stubs, but it isn't.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Is there anything in security/ that we don't have in security2/
>>>>>>>>> or is
>>>>>>>>> better?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> geir
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Unless I hear massive bellowing in opposition, I'm going to move
>>>>>>>>>> security -> security_orig and security2 -> security sometime
>>>>>>>>>> tomorrow.
>>>>>>>>>> Please register protests now...
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> geir
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>
>>
>
--
Tim Ellison (t.p.ellison@gmail.com)
IBM Java technology centre, UK.
Re: [classlib] security2 -> security
Posted by Geir Magnusson Jr <ge...@pobox.com>.
So it's javadoc.
I vote that we :
- take security up and outside of modules/ to a archive/ directory for now
- move security2->security
- over time, start migrating javadoc
Mikhail Loenko wrote:
> I've reviewed exception classes:
>
> General:
> security has javadocs that reword SUN's spec, while sec2 does not have
> security seems to follow 1.4 spec, while sec2 - 1.5
>
> AccessControlException
> - almost no difference. permission field is private in s2 and package-vis in sec
>
> PrivilegedActionException
> - almost the same. the difference is in toString()
>
> DigestException,
> GeneralSecurityException
> InvalidAlgorithmParameterException
> InvalidKeyException
> KeyException
> NoSuchAlgorithmException
> SignatureException
> cert/CertificateEncodingException
> cert/CertificateException
> cert/CertificateParsingException
> cert/CRLException
> - sec misses two constructors (new in 1.5) and serialVersionUID. sec2 has them.
>
> InvalidParameterException
> NoSuchProviderException
> cert/CertificateExpiredException
> cert/CertificateNotYetValidException
> - sec misses serialVersionUID. sec2 has it.
>
>
> KeyManagementException
> KeyStoreException
> ProviderException
> UnrecoverableEntryException
> UnrecoverableKeyException
> acl/*
> spec/*
> cert/CertStoreException
> cert/CertPathBuilderException
> cert/CertPathValidatorException
> - present in security2 only
>
> The question is: are we going to take javadocs?
>
> Thanks,
> Mikhail
>
> On 2/9/06, Mikhail Loenko <ml...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I'm going to walk method by method, compare and present results starting
>> with the easiest cases.
>>
>> I've already taken some look at security so I think it would not be
>> very difficult -
>> it has 50+ classes, ~20 of them are exceptions, there are some interfaces...
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Mikhail
>>
>> On 2/9/06, Geir Magnusson Jr <ge...@pobox.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Tim Ellison wrote:
>>>> +1 to consolidating on a single security module.
>>>> I'm also interested to hear what merging Mikhail has in mind.
>>>>
>>>> I was led to believe that security2 was a proper superset of security,
>>>> so we should be able to do a 'big bang' switch. The security_orig won't
>>>> be too far away if we need to pull something in. (Perhaps move it out
>>>> of trunk/modules/ to avoid confusion?)
>>> Right - it will live forever in SVN, and of course we always can "copy
>>> forward" in time if we need to - i.e. copy from some past rev into
>>> "now", whenever that is.
>>>
>>> I just don't want to lose anything useful that may be in security...
>>>
>>> geir
>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Tim
>>>>
>>>> Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
>>>>> Before you do that...
>>>>>
>>>>> What are you thinking as your approach?
>>>>>
>>>>> geir
>>>>>
>>>>> Mikhail Loenko wrote:
>>>>>> I suggest merging these two bundles. I can do this and provide a patch...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>> Mikhail
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 2/9/06, Mikhail Loenko <ml...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> security classes are a subset of security2 classes.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> security2 is 1.5-ready while security has javadocs. What do you mean
>>>>>>> by 'better'?
>>>>>>> Are there any original approaches or efficient algorithms used in
>>>>>>> security?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>> Mikhail
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 2/9/06, Geir Magnusson Jr <ge...@pobox.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Hm. I thought security was stubs, but it isn't.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Is there anything in security/ that we don't have in security2/ or is
>>>>>>>> better?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> geir
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Unless I hear massive bellowing in opposition, I'm going to move
>>>>>>>>> security -> security_orig and security2 -> security sometime tomorrow.
>>>>>>>>> Please register protests now...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> geir
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>
>
Re: [classlib] security2 -> security
Posted by Mikhail Loenko <ml...@gmail.com>.
I've reviewed exception classes:
General:
security has javadocs that reword SUN's spec, while sec2 does not have
security seems to follow 1.4 spec, while sec2 - 1.5
AccessControlException
- almost no difference. permission field is private in s2 and package-vis in sec
PrivilegedActionException
- almost the same. the difference is in toString()
DigestException,
GeneralSecurityException
InvalidAlgorithmParameterException
InvalidKeyException
KeyException
NoSuchAlgorithmException
SignatureException
cert/CertificateEncodingException
cert/CertificateException
cert/CertificateParsingException
cert/CRLException
- sec misses two constructors (new in 1.5) and serialVersionUID. sec2 has them.
InvalidParameterException
NoSuchProviderException
cert/CertificateExpiredException
cert/CertificateNotYetValidException
- sec misses serialVersionUID. sec2 has it.
KeyManagementException
KeyStoreException
ProviderException
UnrecoverableEntryException
UnrecoverableKeyException
acl/*
spec/*
cert/CertStoreException
cert/CertPathBuilderException
cert/CertPathValidatorException
- present in security2 only
The question is: are we going to take javadocs?
Thanks,
Mikhail
On 2/9/06, Mikhail Loenko <ml...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm going to walk method by method, compare and present results starting
> with the easiest cases.
>
> I've already taken some look at security so I think it would not be
> very difficult -
> it has 50+ classes, ~20 of them are exceptions, there are some interfaces...
>
> Thanks,
> Mikhail
>
> On 2/9/06, Geir Magnusson Jr <ge...@pobox.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Tim Ellison wrote:
> > > +1 to consolidating on a single security module.
> > > I'm also interested to hear what merging Mikhail has in mind.
> > >
> > > I was led to believe that security2 was a proper superset of security,
> > > so we should be able to do a 'big bang' switch. The security_orig won't
> > > be too far away if we need to pull something in. (Perhaps move it out
> > > of trunk/modules/ to avoid confusion?)
> >
> > Right - it will live forever in SVN, and of course we always can "copy
> > forward" in time if we need to - i.e. copy from some past rev into
> > "now", whenever that is.
> >
> > I just don't want to lose anything useful that may be in security...
> >
> > geir
> >
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Tim
> > >
> > > Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
> > >> Before you do that...
> > >>
> > >> What are you thinking as your approach?
> > >>
> > >> geir
> > >>
> > >> Mikhail Loenko wrote:
> > >>> I suggest merging these two bundles. I can do this and provide a patch...
> > >>>
> > >>> Thanks,
> > >>> Mikhail
> > >>>
> > >>> On 2/9/06, Mikhail Loenko <ml...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>>> security classes are a subset of security2 classes.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> security2 is 1.5-ready while security has javadocs. What do you mean
> > >>>> by 'better'?
> > >>>> Are there any original approaches or efficient algorithms used in
> > >>>> security?
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Thanks,
> > >>>> Mikhail
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> On 2/9/06, Geir Magnusson Jr <ge...@pobox.com> wrote:
> > >>>>> Hm. I thought security was stubs, but it isn't.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Is there anything in security/ that we don't have in security2/ or is
> > >>>>> better?
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> geir
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
> > >>>>>> Unless I hear massive bellowing in opposition, I'm going to move
> > >>>>>> security -> security_orig and security2 -> security sometime tomorrow.
> > >>>>>> Please register protests now...
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> geir
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>
> > >
> >
>
Re: [classlib] security2 -> security
Posted by Mikhail Loenko <ml...@gmail.com>.
I'm going to walk method by method, compare and present results starting
with the easiest cases.
I've already taken some look at security so I think it would not be
very difficult -
it has 50+ classes, ~20 of them are exceptions, there are some interfaces...
Thanks,
Mikhail
On 2/9/06, Geir Magnusson Jr <ge...@pobox.com> wrote:
>
>
> Tim Ellison wrote:
> > +1 to consolidating on a single security module.
> > I'm also interested to hear what merging Mikhail has in mind.
> >
> > I was led to believe that security2 was a proper superset of security,
> > so we should be able to do a 'big bang' switch. The security_orig won't
> > be too far away if we need to pull something in. (Perhaps move it out
> > of trunk/modules/ to avoid confusion?)
>
> Right - it will live forever in SVN, and of course we always can "copy
> forward" in time if we need to - i.e. copy from some past rev into
> "now", whenever that is.
>
> I just don't want to lose anything useful that may be in security...
>
> geir
>
> >
> > Regards,
> > Tim
> >
> > Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
> >> Before you do that...
> >>
> >> What are you thinking as your approach?
> >>
> >> geir
> >>
> >> Mikhail Loenko wrote:
> >>> I suggest merging these two bundles. I can do this and provide a patch...
> >>>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>> Mikhail
> >>>
> >>> On 2/9/06, Mikhail Loenko <ml...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>> security classes are a subset of security2 classes.
> >>>>
> >>>> security2 is 1.5-ready while security has javadocs. What do you mean
> >>>> by 'better'?
> >>>> Are there any original approaches or efficient algorithms used in
> >>>> security?
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks,
> >>>> Mikhail
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On 2/9/06, Geir Magnusson Jr <ge...@pobox.com> wrote:
> >>>>> Hm. I thought security was stubs, but it isn't.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Is there anything in security/ that we don't have in security2/ or is
> >>>>> better?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> geir
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
> >>>>>> Unless I hear massive bellowing in opposition, I'm going to move
> >>>>>> security -> security_orig and security2 -> security sometime tomorrow.
> >>>>>> Please register protests now...
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> geir
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>
> >
>
Re: [classlib] security2 -> security
Posted by Geir Magnusson Jr <ge...@pobox.com>.
Tim Ellison wrote:
> +1 to consolidating on a single security module.
> I'm also interested to hear what merging Mikhail has in mind.
>
> I was led to believe that security2 was a proper superset of security,
> so we should be able to do a 'big bang' switch. The security_orig won't
> be too far away if we need to pull something in. (Perhaps move it out
> of trunk/modules/ to avoid confusion?)
Right - it will live forever in SVN, and of course we always can "copy
forward" in time if we need to - i.e. copy from some past rev into
"now", whenever that is.
I just don't want to lose anything useful that may be in security...
geir
>
> Regards,
> Tim
>
> Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
>> Before you do that...
>>
>> What are you thinking as your approach?
>>
>> geir
>>
>> Mikhail Loenko wrote:
>>> I suggest merging these two bundles. I can do this and provide a patch...
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Mikhail
>>>
>>> On 2/9/06, Mikhail Loenko <ml...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> security classes are a subset of security2 classes.
>>>>
>>>> security2 is 1.5-ready while security has javadocs. What do you mean
>>>> by 'better'?
>>>> Are there any original approaches or efficient algorithms used in
>>>> security?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Mikhail
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 2/9/06, Geir Magnusson Jr <ge...@pobox.com> wrote:
>>>>> Hm. I thought security was stubs, but it isn't.
>>>>>
>>>>> Is there anything in security/ that we don't have in security2/ or is
>>>>> better?
>>>>>
>>>>> geir
>>>>>
>>>>> Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
>>>>>> Unless I hear massive bellowing in opposition, I'm going to move
>>>>>> security -> security_orig and security2 -> security sometime tomorrow.
>>>>>> Please register protests now...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> geir
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>
>
Re: [classlib] security2 -> security
Posted by Tim Ellison <t....@gmail.com>.
+1 to consolidating on a single security module.
I'm also interested to hear what merging Mikhail has in mind.
I was led to believe that security2 was a proper superset of security,
so we should be able to do a 'big bang' switch. The security_orig won't
be too far away if we need to pull something in. (Perhaps move it out
of trunk/modules/ to avoid confusion?)
Regards,
Tim
Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
> Before you do that...
>
> What are you thinking as your approach?
>
> geir
>
> Mikhail Loenko wrote:
>> I suggest merging these two bundles. I can do this and provide a patch...
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Mikhail
>>
>> On 2/9/06, Mikhail Loenko <ml...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> security classes are a subset of security2 classes.
>>>
>>> security2 is 1.5-ready while security has javadocs. What do you mean
>>> by 'better'?
>>> Are there any original approaches or efficient algorithms used in
>>> security?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Mikhail
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2/9/06, Geir Magnusson Jr <ge...@pobox.com> wrote:
>>>> Hm. I thought security was stubs, but it isn't.
>>>>
>>>> Is there anything in security/ that we don't have in security2/ or is
>>>> better?
>>>>
>>>> geir
>>>>
>>>> Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
>>>>> Unless I hear massive bellowing in opposition, I'm going to move
>>>>> security -> security_orig and security2 -> security sometime tomorrow.
>>>>> Please register protests now...
>>>>>
>>>>> geir
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>
>>
>
--
Tim Ellison (t.p.ellison@gmail.com)
IBM Java technology centre, UK.
Re: [classlib] security2 -> security
Posted by Geir Magnusson Jr <ge...@pobox.com>.
Before you do that...
What are you thinking as your approach?
geir
Mikhail Loenko wrote:
> I suggest merging these two bundles. I can do this and provide a patch...
>
> Thanks,
> Mikhail
>
> On 2/9/06, Mikhail Loenko <ml...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> security classes are a subset of security2 classes.
>>
>> security2 is 1.5-ready while security has javadocs. What do you mean
>> by 'better'?
>> Are there any original approaches or efficient algorithms used in security?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Mikhail
>>
>>
>> On 2/9/06, Geir Magnusson Jr <ge...@pobox.com> wrote:
>>> Hm. I thought security was stubs, but it isn't.
>>>
>>> Is there anything in security/ that we don't have in security2/ or is
>>> better?
>>>
>>> geir
>>>
>>> Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
>>>> Unless I hear massive bellowing in opposition, I'm going to move
>>>> security -> security_orig and security2 -> security sometime tomorrow.
>>>> Please register protests now...
>>>>
>>>> geir
>>>>
>>>>
>
>
Re: [classlib] security2 -> security
Posted by Mikhail Loenko <ml...@gmail.com>.
I suggest merging these two bundles. I can do this and provide a patch...
Thanks,
Mikhail
On 2/9/06, Mikhail Loenko <ml...@gmail.com> wrote:
> security classes are a subset of security2 classes.
>
> security2 is 1.5-ready while security has javadocs. What do you mean
> by 'better'?
> Are there any original approaches or efficient algorithms used in security?
>
> Thanks,
> Mikhail
>
>
> On 2/9/06, Geir Magnusson Jr <ge...@pobox.com> wrote:
> > Hm. I thought security was stubs, but it isn't.
> >
> > Is there anything in security/ that we don't have in security2/ or is
> > better?
> >
> > geir
> >
> > Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
> > > Unless I hear massive bellowing in opposition, I'm going to move
> > > security -> security_orig and security2 -> security sometime tomorrow.
> > > Please register protests now...
> > >
> > > geir
> > >
> > >
> >
>
Re: [classlib] security2 -> security
Posted by Mikhail Loenko <ml...@gmail.com>.
security classes are a subset of security2 classes.
security2 is 1.5-ready while security has javadocs. What do you mean
by 'better'?
Are there any original approaches or efficient algorithms used in security?
Thanks,
Mikhail
On 2/9/06, Geir Magnusson Jr <ge...@pobox.com> wrote:
> Hm. I thought security was stubs, but it isn't.
>
> Is there anything in security/ that we don't have in security2/ or is
> better?
>
> geir
>
> Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
> > Unless I hear massive bellowing in opposition, I'm going to move
> > security -> security_orig and security2 -> security sometime tomorrow.
> > Please register protests now...
> >
> > geir
> >
> >
>
Re: [classlib] security2 -> security
Posted by Geir Magnusson Jr <ge...@pobox.com>.
Hm. I thought security was stubs, but it isn't.
Is there anything in security/ that we don't have in security2/ or is
better?
geir
Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
> Unless I hear massive bellowing in opposition, I'm going to move
> security -> security_orig and security2 -> security sometime tomorrow.
> Please register protests now...
>
> geir
>
>