RE: [PROPOSAL] White-Label Releases Only

["Dennis E. Hamilton" <or...@apache.org>]

 
 -- in reply to --
From: jan i [mailto:jani@apache.org] 
Sent: Sunday, December 21, 2014 13:33
To: dev@corinthia.incubator.apache.org; orcmid@apache.org
Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] White-Box Releases Only

On Sunday, December 21, 2014, Dennis E. Hamilton <or...@apache.org> wrote:

[ ... ]
>      Convenience binaries for end-user code should probably be branded
>      for support differentiation as authentic to the Corinthia project.
>      That would usually have them tied to a particular source release
>      despite their being incidental platform-build differences.  The
>      libraries should be distinguished appropriately although branding
>      is not the issue as much as authenticity against source.

I don't have  a good idea for the libraries, but I highly agree that appls
should be branded.

<orcnote>
   For .lib and for .dll files, one could add an appropriately-named
   version function (i.e., the name is version specific).
   The .dll could be signed in a way that can be cross-checked in some 
   manner.
   I don't know if .so files are in a form that can be signed.  Not sure
   about .lib files either.  If they can, I think they should be.
</orcnote>

[ ... ]