Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-general-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 31461 invoked from network); 23 May 2005 08:19:27 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 23 May 2005 08:19:27 -0000 Received: (qmail 84762 invoked by uid 500); 23 May 2005 08:19:24 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-general-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 84709 invoked by uid 500); 23 May 2005 08:19:23 -0000 Mailing-List: contact general-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: general@incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list general@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 84685 invoked by uid 99); 23 May 2005 08:19:23 -0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests= X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (hermes.apache.org: local policy) Received: from bodewig.bost.de (HELO bodewig.bost.de) (62.96.16.111) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.28) with ESMTP; Mon, 23 May 2005 01:19:22 -0700 Received: (from bodewig@localhost) by bodewig.bost.de (8.11.6/8.11.6) id j4N8JFI08462; Mon, 23 May 2005 10:19:15 +0200 X-Authentication-Warning: bodewig.bost.de: bodewig set sender to bodewig@apache.org using -f To: general@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Apache TSIK X-Draft-From: ("nnfolder:asf-stuff" 830) References: <4291053E.4050405@algroup.co.uk> From: Stefan Bodewig Date: Mon, 23 May 2005 10:19:15 +0200 In-Reply-To: <4291053E.4050405@algroup.co.uk> (Ben Laurie's message of "Sun, 22 May 2005 23:18:38 +0100") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.1007 (Gnus v5.10.7) XEmacs/21.4.17 (Jumbo Shrimp, linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 X-Virus-Checked: Checked X-Spam-Rating: minotaur.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N On Sun, 22 May 2005, Ben Laurie wrote: > Noel J. Bergman wrote: >> There is a proposed "PGP" package being discussed in Jakarta >> Commons. Would there be any overlap at lower levels (not at the WS >> layer) between them, providing for some collaboration? > > This strikes me as orthogonal, Same here. > but it might be of interest that I'm currently working on a > to-be-BSD-licensed (or equivalent) PGP C library. Interesting, yes. The goal of the commons component is to provide an easier API for the "simple" task of signing a stream or verifying the signature. This is what the Maven and Ant build tools would need today. En-/Decryprion may come later as well. There already exist at least two "license compatible" Java libraries that provide OpenPGP functionality (bouncycastle.org and cryptix.org) so the component is also going to provide an implementation agnostic interface. Bindings to command line invocations of OpenPGP compatible toolkits or JNI bindings to a C-library would certainly be possible as well. > BTW, its properly called OpenPGP. We started with PGP (based on ignorance, mainly 8-) but have made up our mind already and will call it commons-openpgp. Unless we broaden the scope even more so it would become commons-crypto - in which case there'd be more overlap with XML security or TSIK. Stefan --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org