Re: [DISCUSS] Some SSHD refactoring before 2.0.0

>>> > I think this is a worthy purpose nevertheless and feel very strongly that > we should keep them - I don't see the harm > > BTW, I could argue the same case against *InitializingBean* and > *DisposableBean* in view of *@PostConstruct* and *@PreDispose*, but I still > think they are very

Re: [DISCUSS] Some SSHD refactoring before 2.0.0

Le 01/06/2018 à 11:29, Guillaume Nodet a écrit : > Yes, I came up to the same conclusion too. > Could you delete the sshd-core/hostey.ser and try again please ? Much better once the hostkey.ser is deleted... INFO] Results: [INFO] [ERROR] Failures: [ERROR]

Re: [DISCUSS] Some SSHD refactoring before 2.0.0

2018-06-01 11:58 GMT+02:00 Lyor Goldstein : > >>> In our case, I don't see any real purpose for all those interfaces > beyond > linking together unrelated objects just because they hold the same kind > object. > > I think this is a worthy purpose nevertheless and feel very strongly that > we

Re: [DISCUSS] Some SSHD refactoring before 2.0.0

>>> In our case, I don't see any real purpose for all those interfaces beyond linking together unrelated objects just because they hold the same kind object. I think this is a worthy purpose nevertheless and feel very strongly that we should keep them - I don't see the harm BTW, I could

Re: [DISCUSS] Some SSHD refactoring before 2.0.0

>>> But if the community want to pursue the 2.0.0 release as it is, that's fine with me, I can restart a vote quickly, as I haven't deleted the staging repository or tag yet I'm with Jonathan on this - let's release 2.0 as planned, and then discuss and implement whatever re-factoring is deemed

Re: [DISCUSS] Some SSHD refactoring before 2.0.0

Yes, I came up to the same conclusion too. Could you delete the sshd-core/hostey.ser and try again please ? I can't figure why BC would generate a modulus that would be rejected later :-( 2018-06-01 9:44 GMT+02:00 Emmanuel Lécharny : > > > Le 01/06/2018 à 09:10, Guillaume Nodet a écrit : > >

Result, was: [VOTE] Apache MINA 2.0.18

Hi guys, I'm therefore closing this vote with 3 binding +1 : Jeff, Guillaume and me and 1 non-binding vote (Christoph John) Many thanks for your time ! I'll push the packages and update the website asap. Le 29/05/2018 à 20:44, Jeff Genender a écrit : > +1 > > Jeff > > >> On May 29, 2018,

Re: [DISCUSS] Some SSHD refactoring before 2.0.0

Le 01/06/2018 à 09:10, Guillaume Nodet a écrit : > Cool, that gives a lot of information. The problems seems to come from the > following exception: > java.lang.IllegalArgumentException: RSA modulus has a small prime factor > > I'll investigate the possible causes. Looking at BC code at

Re: [DISCUSS] Some SSHD refactoring before 2.0.0

I've pushed a branch that can be discussed further at: https://github.com/gnodet/mina-sshd/tree/refactoring 2018-05-31 16:42 GMT+02:00 Guillaume Nodet : > Following the discussion in SSHD-340 > , I'd like to start > refactoring a few internal

Re: [DISCUSS] Some SSHD refactoring before 2.0.0

2018-05-31 19:52 GMT+02:00 Lyor Goldstein : > > >> remove a few interfaces which are not actually used, i.e. they've > been > > introduced because various classes have methods with similar signatures, > > but there's no real concept behind > > > > I disagree with the characterization that they

Re: [DISCUSS] Some SSHD refactoring before 2.0.0

Cool, that gives a lot of information. The problems seems to come from the following exception: java.lang.IllegalArgumentException: RSA modulus has a small prime factor I'll investigate the possible causes. 2018-06-01 8:36 GMT+02:00 Emmanuel Lécharny : > > > Le 01/06/2018 à 08:10, Guillaume

Re: [DISCUSS] Some SSHD refactoring before 2.0.0

Le 01/06/2018 à 08:10, Guillaume Nodet a écrit : > Not really. > > Could you try running only those tests ? > Maybe raising the log level to DEBUG in > sshd-core/src/test/resources/log4j.properties, > running: > mvn clean test -Dtest=AsyncAuth\*Test > and gist the content of the

Re: [DISCUSS] Some SSHD refactoring before 2.0.0

Not really. Could you try running only those tests ? Maybe raising the log level to DEBUG in sshd-core/src/test/resources/log4j.properties, running: mvn clean test -Dtest=AsyncAuth\*Test and gist the content of the sshd-core/target/sshd-core-tests.log somewhere ? 2018-06-01 6:47 GMT+02:00