Mailing-List: contact harmony-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: neutral (asf.osuosl.org: 64.74.244.71 is neither permitted nor
 denied by domain of geir@pobox.com)
Message-ID: <43EC9E78.3080202@pobox.com>
Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2006 09:08:56 -0500
From: Geir Magnusson Jr <geir@pobox.com>
Reply-To: geir@pobox.com
User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5 (Windows/20051201)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [classlib] proposal to revisit componentization for security
 (was: Re: problems with security2)
References: <906dd82e0601182114v3af679f5n95a58fe4fb1355fc@mail.gmail.com>
	 <6e47b64f0601260541s7b9a4535x9987e4c2893cbe8@mail.gmail.com>
	 <43D9FB67.7020605@pobox.com>
	 <6e47b64f0601270546u5747402bid0eac079604f9c30@mail.gmail.com>
	 <43DA3D18.10006@pobox.com>
 <906dd82e0602100438t5ef58d2ape7e7379b2a2d6087@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <906dd82e0602100438t5ef58d2ape7e7379b2a2d6087@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

I don't understand.  I did the breakout of x-net...

Mikhail Loenko wrote:
> Geir
> 
> Sounds like no one objects to the proposal itself, the discussion is about the
> naming. Could you please approve/decline new componentization?
> 
> Thanks,
> Mikhail
> 
> On 1/27/06, Geir Magnusson Jr <geir@pobox.com> wrote:
>>
>> Stepan Mishura wrote:
>>>> Sounds dirty.  How about security-x?
>>>>
>>> Ok. I named it by analogy with x-net. Your variant works for me.
>> x-net has the same issue for me.  I figure that net-x is better too
>> because it will sit next to net in a directory/IDE package tree, etc...
>> (just like security-x near security)
>>
>> geir
>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Stepan
>>>
>>>
>>> On 1/27/06, Geir Magnusson Jr <geir@pobox.com> wrote:
>>>> Sounds dirty.  How about security-x?
>>>>
>>>> Stepan Mishura wrote:
>>>>> I agree with the proposal and I'm ready to start working on a patch for
>>>>> splitting 'security2' into suggested components and integrating them
>>>> with
>>>>> the current build.
>>>>>
>>>>> Also I'd like to suggest a name for a new component: 'x-security'.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Stepan Mishura
>>>>> Intel Middleware Products Division
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 1/19/06, Mikhail Loenko <mloenko@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Hello
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Let's start a different thread for that.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I suggest revisiting current componentization for security related
>>>> parts.
>>>>>> Now we have for example crypto architecture in security module but
>>>>>> crypto extension in the crypto module.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> See natural components in the UserGuide
>>>>>> http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.5.0/docs/guide/security/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The proposal is to have 3 components:
>>>>>> 1. general security & crypto
>>>>>> 2. ssl
>>>>>> 3. jaas
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The logical content of those components would be:
>>>>>> 1.
>>>>>> - General Security
>>>>>> - Certification Path
>>>>>> - JCE
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2.
>>>>>> - JSSE
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 3.
>>>>>> - JAAS
>>>>>> - JGSS
>>>>>> - SASL
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Physical content of those components:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1.
>>>>>> java.security
>>>>>> javax.crypto
>>>>>> javax.security.cert
>>>>>> 2.
>>>>>> javax.net
>>>>>> 3.
>>>>>> javax.security w/o javax.security.cert
>>>>>> org.ietf
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Opinions?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>> Mikhail Loenko
>>>>>> Intel Middleware Products Division
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Thanks,
>>> Stepan Mishura
>>> Intel Middleware Products Division
>>>
> 
>