> On May 25, 2015, at 3:00 AM, Alan Bateman <alan.bate...@oracle.com> wrote: > > On 25/05/2015 09:53, Chris Hegarty wrote: >> >> If it is agreed that these files are needed, then I can look at expanding >> the ImageBuilder to do concatenate them. > I agree with Mandy's point that java.security should be change to list the > provider name rather than the class name. If that happens then it means that > the service configuration files will be required. > > I don't have a strong view on whether the concatenation is done via make > files or the image builder as it's all just temporary and will go away once > resources are keyed by a module. One thing about rev'ing the image builder is > that we should probably let the jimage refresh get into jdk9/dev first. I > don't think we want to delay that due to merge conflicts.
Right this is all temporary. One benefit of having the concatenation done by image builder will get the makefile cleaned up and get ready for the resources keyed for a module as long as the work required is small. Good point about image refresh and any image builder change should come after jimage refresh to avoid causing any merge conflict. Depending on when the image refresh and this security provider change are ready to push to jdk9/dev, I can work with Valerie to determine whether to wait or phase it. thanks Mandy
