-SNAPSHOT/commons-crypto-1.0.0-20160722.085755-6.jar
Thanks & Regards
Dapeng
-Original Message-
From: Sun, Dapeng [mailto:dapeng@intel.com]
Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2016 6:48 PM
To: Commons Developers List
Subject: RE: [CRYPTO]1.0.0 Release Plan
Thank Dennis for your suggestion, bu
rsday, July 14, 2016 11:18 PM
To: 'Commons Developers List'
Subject: RE: [CRYPTO]1.0.0 Release Plan
I don't know if the deployment method for the binaries (.jar, etc.) of these
releases provides useful download statistics for the Commons project.
If it does, differentiating by the
.@gmail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2016 09:09
> To: Commons Developers List
> Subject: Re: [CRYPTO]1.0.0 Release Plan
>
> On 12 July 2016 at 14:54, sebb wrote:
> > On 12 July 2016 at 14:20, Sun, Dapeng wrote:
> >> Separating artifacts for each native library, I think
needs updating with all the other relevant fixes.
> Regards
> Dapeng
>
> -Original Message-
> From: sebb [mailto:seb...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 13, 2016 12:09 AM
> To: Commons Developers List
> Subject: Re: [CRYPTO]1.0.0 Release Plan
>
> On 12 Ju
/commons-crypto/1.0.0-SNAPSHOT/commons-crypto-1.0.0-20160713.032556-2.jar
Regards
Dapeng
-Original Message-
From: sebb [mailto:seb...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 13, 2016 12:09 AM
To: Commons Developers List
Subject: Re: [CRYPTO]1.0.0 Release Plan
On 12 July 2016 at 14:54, sebb
MacOSX installed jar includes
the jnilib file.
> That would give users a different choice:
> - download the specific build for their system; this would work as is
> - download the combined build for all released native targets
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Marcelo Vanzi
Message-
> From: Marcelo Vanzin [mailto:van...@cloudera.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2016 2:09 AM
> To: Commons Developers List
> Subject: Re: [CRYPTO]1.0.0 Release Plan
>
> On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 2:34 AM, sebb wrote:
>> However bundling multiple native binaries is go
platforms, especially for the platforms they
don't need.
-Original Message-
From: Marcelo Vanzin [mailto:van...@cloudera.com]
Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2016 2:09 AM
To: Commons Developers List
Subject: Re: [CRYPTO]1.0.0 Release Plan
On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 2:34 AM, sebb wrote:
>
...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, July 11, 2016 5:35 PM
To: Commons Developers List
Subject: Re: [CRYPTO]1.0.0 Release Plan
On 11 July 2016 at 09:02, Sun, Dapeng wrote:
> About the native binaries, I think we should put them in the same jar
> finally. CRYPTO is library, user shouldn't need
On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 11:08 AM, Marcelo Vanzin
wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 2:34 AM, sebb wrote:
> > However bundling multiple native binaries is going to make it tricky to
> release.
> > How will it be done? The native parts will have to be built separately
> > and then combined somehow.
On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 2:34 AM, sebb wrote:
> However bundling multiple native binaries is going to make it tricky to
> release.
> How will it be done? The native parts will have to be built separately
> and then combined somehow.
The way I'd do it is to have separate artifacts for each native
the binary file is not in small size...
>
> Regards
> Dapeng
>
> -Original Message-
> From: sebb [mailto:seb...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Saturday, July 09, 2016 2:19 AM
> To: Commons Developers List
> Subject: Re: [CRYPTO]1.0.0 Release Plan
>
> On 8 July 2016 at 18:56, Gar
eb...@gmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, July 09, 2016 2:19 AM
To: Commons Developers List
Subject: Re: [CRYPTO]1.0.0 Release Plan
On 8 July 2016 at 18:56, Gary Gregory wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 10:46 AM, Bhowmik, Bindul
>
> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 11:37 AM, sebb wr
On 8 July 2016 at 18:37, sebb wrote:
> On 8 July 2016 at 18:31, Gary Gregory wrote:
>> On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 10:07 AM, Marcelo Vanzin wrote:
>>
>>> Answering based on old knowledge of this code, but I don't believe it
>>> has changed...
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 9:36 AM, Gary Gregory
>>>
sebb wrote:
[snip]
> But longer term it might be better to release the JNI binaries
> separately from the Java binaries.
> This would allow new OSes to be added without having to re-release
> everything.
This one might help: http://maven-nar.github.io/
I've used a very old version of it several
On 8 July 2016 at 18:56, Gary Gregory wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 10:46 AM, Bhowmik, Bindul
> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 11:37 AM, sebb wrote:
>> > On 8 July 2016 at 18:31, Gary Gregory wrote:
>> >> On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 10:07 AM, Marcelo Vanzin
>> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> Answering ba
On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 10:56 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 10:46 AM, Bhowmik, Bindul
> wrote:
>> One option could be to go the Eclipse way, the way they handle SWT
>> distributions which have native components[1].
>>
> Yeah, that seems like a more normal way to go.
It's fine t
On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 10:46 AM, Bhowmik, Bindul
wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 11:37 AM, sebb wrote:
> > On 8 July 2016 at 18:31, Gary Gregory wrote:
> >> On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 10:07 AM, Marcelo Vanzin
> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Answering based on old knowledge of this code, but I don't believe it
On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 11:37 AM, sebb wrote:
> On 8 July 2016 at 18:31, Gary Gregory wrote:
>> On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 10:07 AM, Marcelo Vanzin wrote:
>>
>>> Answering based on old knowledge of this code, but I don't believe it
>>> has changed...
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 9:36 AM, Gary Grego
On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 10:37 AM, sebb wrote:
> On 8 July 2016 at 18:31, Gary Gregory wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 10:07 AM, Marcelo Vanzin
> wrote:
> >
> >> Answering based on old knowledge of this code, but I don't believe it
> >> has changed...
> >>
> >> On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 9:36 AM, G
On 8 July 2016 at 18:31, Gary Gregory wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 10:07 AM, Marcelo Vanzin wrote:
>
>> Answering based on old knowledge of this code, but I don't believe it
>> has changed...
>>
>> On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 9:36 AM, Gary Gregory
>> wrote:
>> > The delivered jar file contains a n
On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 10:07 AM, Marcelo Vanzin wrote:
> Answering based on old knowledge of this code, but I don't believe it
> has changed...
>
> On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 9:36 AM, Gary Gregory
> wrote:
> > The delivered jar file contains a native .so file, and this .so file is
> > _extracted_ an
Answering based on old knowledge of this code, but I don't believe it
has changed...
On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 9:36 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
> The delivered jar file contains a native .so file, and this .so file is
> _extracted_ and _installed_ on the user's machine at runtime? See
> NativeCodeLoader
ge-
> From: sebb [mailto:seb...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 28, 2016 6:48 PM
> To: Commons Developers List
> Subject: Re: [CRYPTO]1.0.0 Release Plan
>
> On 28 June 2016 at 07:03, Sun, Dapeng wrote:
> > Thank Sebb for your great work!
> >
> > About the
Hi all,
Please let me know if there is any blocks need to be resolved before the
release.
Regards
Dapeng
-Original Message-
From: sebb [mailto:seb...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 28, 2016 6:48 PM
To: Commons Developers List
Subject: Re: [CRYPTO]1.0.0 Release Plan
On 28 June 2016 at
nsformation, String classids)
These would each create a Property instance and call the existing
getInstance method
This would not save a lot of code, but it would be simpler for the
OpenSSL implementations at least.
> Regards
> Dapeng
>
> -Original Message-
> From: sebb
could you tell me more detail?
Regards
Dapeng
-Original Message-
From: sebb [mailto:seb...@gmail.com]
Sent: Sunday, June 26, 2016 7:53 AM
To: Commons Developers List
Subject: Re: [CRYPTO]1.0.0 Release Plan
On 24 June 2016 at 11:17, sebb wrote:
> On 24 June 2016 at 10:08, Sun, Dapeng
On 24 June 2016 at 11:17, sebb wrote:
> On 24 June 2016 at 10:08, Sun, Dapeng wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Thank all for helping review CRYPTO from different angles.
>>
>> According the number of jira remaining issues, I prefer to start the thread
>> for rolling a RC at June 29th(Next Wednesday). Ple
On 24 June 2016 at 10:08, Sun, Dapeng wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Thank all for helping review CRYPTO from different angles.
>
> According the number of jira remaining issues, I prefer to start the thread
> for rolling a RC at June 29th(Next Wednesday). Please feel free to let me
> know if you have any
Hi all,
Thank all for helping review CRYPTO from different angles.
According the number of jira remaining issues, I prefer to start the thread for
rolling a RC at June 29th(Next Wednesday). Please feel free to let me know if
you have any concern about it.
Regards
Dapeng
-Original Message-
lar you need to have openssl library
> headers.
Good suggestion, I will add the requirements to BUILDING.txt
Regards
Dapeng
-Original Message-
From: Stian Soiland-Reyes [mailto:st...@apache.org]
Sent: Monday, June 06, 2016 11:53 PM
To: Commons Developers List
Subject: Re: [CRYPTO]1.0
-Original Message-
From: Gary Gregory [mailto:garydgreg...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, June 06, 2016 10:53 PM
To: Commons Developers List
Subject: Re: [CRYPTO]1.0.0 Release Plan
Why don't you give us a couple of days before rolling an RC, I for one, would
like to review the project a little
Thank Benedikt.
Regards
Dapeng
-Original Message-
From: Benedikt Ritter [mailto:brit...@apache.org]
Sent: Monday, June 06, 2016 5:50 PM
To: Commons Developers List
Subject: Re: [CRYPTO]1.0.0 Release Plan
Hello Dapeng
Sun, Dapeng schrieb am Mo., 6. Juni 2016 um
11:13 Uhr:
> He
Makes sense for the first release.. like a pre-release candidate
candidate, tested from git.
So we can assume the current master (commit
a289ecd26257ac4ffaf1bbb686cf06b3a9ececdc) is buildable, right?
https://github.com/apache/commons-crypto/blob/master/BUILDING.txt
describes build requirements -
Why don't you give us a couple of days before rolling an RC, I for one,
would like to review the project a little more carefully. This would avoid
wasting time on failed RCs and give an opportunity for others committers
and PMC members to make any changes they think should be be done. Could be
thin
Hello Dapeng
Sun, Dapeng schrieb am Mo., 6. Juni 2016 um
11:13 Uhr:
> Hello,
>
> Apache Commons CRYPTO was established at May 9, 2016[1], There are
> presently numbers of resolved issues fix in CRYPTO[2]. Recently, we also
> fixed the legal issue[3].
>
> With the first release, we can begin to p
36 matches
Mail list logo
