Can't say I really like 'crypto-interface' too much... I'm not too concerned about confusing users either... but maybe I should be.
--jason On 3/23/06, John Sisson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Aaron Mulder wrote: > > Starting an e-mail thread aside from the JIRA... > > > > I would *really* like to rename the util module. It's got our > > bouncycastle import, plus some random Geronimo code dealing with > > encryption and certificates. > > > > I believe the best name for it is "crypto". John pointed out that > > that isn't the greatest name since ASN1 and encoders such as Base64 > > aren't necessarily crypto. But this package deals with encryption, > > decryptions, digests, PKI and certificates, etc. The bouncycastle > > mailing lists are dev-crypto and accounce-crypto. I think the > > "crypto" name, even if not perfect, fits much better than the "util" > > name (which to me implies a general utility library like String > > utilities, etc.). If necessary, I'd go as far as moving encoders to > > the common module just to be able to give this one a better name, > > because it does seem quite focused to me and not at all general. > > > > Could we get more thoughts on this? > > > > Thanks, > > Aaron > > > > > I was also concerned that if people see a crypto module they will think > that Geronimo has its own crypto implementation (which AFAIK is not the > case). > > Users that think we have a crypto implementation may then become worried > about government crypto export/import licenses etc. > > Not sure if crypto-interface is much clearer. > > Regards, > > John >
