commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Chris Black <ch...@lotuscat.com>
Subject Re: [codec] crypto-compat BigInt patch, no feedback for one month
Date Thu, 23 Mar 2006 06:07:06 GMT
Gary Gregory wrote:

>Hello:
>
>I've done some [codec] work over the years and there are probably enough
>little fixes for a minor release but I've not seen anything to motivate
>me for a major release. 
>  
>
I don't mind using a snapshot or a minor release, I would just prefer 
not to have to worry about maintaining a local copy and a local patch 
for what I find is useful functionality.

>Frankly, copying code from one project to another is not a motivation
>for me and actually it is not something I want to promote. If I need
>some functionality from one project, I use that project. I happen to use
>both [codec] and [xml-security] at work, so, personally, I am not driven
>to do anything about this issue.
>  
>
It isn't a strict copying of code (rewrote for clarity, matching style, 
javadoc, and added junit tests), and I think this functionality really 
belongs in codec not xml-security for a couple of reasons:
1) It is useful outside of xml security for code that does not need 
anything from xml security but this functionality (which is not 
obviously/easily exposed from xml security)
2) It has to do with base64 encoding and fits in well to the existing 
Base64 class

Chris

>What [codec] needs IMO is the ability to operate on streams and
>readers/writers.
>
>Gary
>
>  
>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: robert burrell donkin
>>    
>>
>[mailto:robertburrelldonkin@blueyonder.co.uk]
>  
>
>>Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2006 2:35 PM
>>To: Jakarta Commons Developers List
>>Subject: Re: [codec] crypto-compat BigInt patch, no feedback for one
>>    
>>
>month
>  
>
>>On Wed, 2006-03-22 at 09:48 -0600, Chris Black wrote:
>>    
>>
>>>Over a month ago I submitted a proposed patch to commons-codec to
>>>      
>>>
>add
>  
>
>>>crypto-compatible BigInteger encoding support to Base64 (bugzilla
>>>#38657). I have not received any feedback on this patch so far and
>>>realize it may not be a priority for others, but I was wondering if
>>>there was anything else I could do to get a committer to consider
>>>      
>>>
>this
>  
>
>>>patch. Or perhaps guidance on what I may be doing wrong in terms of
>>>      
>>>
>the
>  
>
>>>development/communication process.
>>>      
>>>
>>i'm not sure you've done anything particularly wrong. codec's probably
>>    
>>
>a
>  
>
>>little short of developer energy ATM and so reports may get a little
>>dusty. so, posting a mail such as this is the right thing to do in the
>>circumstances.
>>
>>i'm not very familiar with codec. hopefully, a committer who is will
>>step up sometime soon. (it can take a few days to establish
>>communication.)
>>
>>if not, i'll try to take a look but it'll probably be the weekend.
>>
>>i probably won't find the energy to push codec forward in the medium
>>term so you might find yourself submitting more patches if you need
>>    
>>
>more
>  
>
>>changes...
>>
>>- robert
>>    
>>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org


Mime
View raw message