: Daniel Gandara [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2006 2:17 AM
To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [classlib] resolution of rmi/math/crypto duplication?
Vasily,
Thanks for your feedback, I'm sending the updated doc.
I believe we should open a new thre
TED]
Sent: Saturday, July 29, 2006 7:11 AM
To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [classlib] resolution of rmi/math/crypto duplication?
Hi,
Attached you will find the rmi package comparison document
we created at the ITC; in it you will find a brief summary of each
contribute
>On 7/21/06, Geir Magnusson Jr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Daniel Fridlender wrote:
>> > On 7/21/06, Tim Ellison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >> Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
>> >> > While it's not a critical thing, this seems like something we want to
>> >> > put to bed. Tim tried taking a ru
In the case of crypto, Intel contributed not only javax.crypto but
java.security as well, so I think it's the one to be used. I think some code
of ITC has already been integrated (for instance in DESKeySpec), and other
differences, such as the static initialization of exceptions, have been
correc
On 7/21/06, Geir Magnusson Jr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Daniel Fridlender wrote:
> On 7/21/06, Tim Ellison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
>> > While it's not a critical thing, this seems like something we want to
>> > put to bed. Tim tried taking a run at this for one
Daniel Fridlender wrote:
> On 7/21/06, Tim Ellison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
>> > While it's not a critical thing, this seems like something we want to
>> > put to bed. Tim tried taking a run at this for one of these last week,
>> > and I'd like to try again.
>> >
>>
On 7/21/06, Tim Ellison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
> While it's not a critical thing, this seems like something we want to
> put to bed. Tim tried taking a run at this for one of these last week,
> and I'd like to try again.
>
> Would some number of days of discussion (l
Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
> While it's not a critical thing, this seems like something we want to
> put to bed. Tim tried taking a run at this for one of these last week,
> and I'd like to try again.
>
> Would some number of days of discussion (like 3) plus a vote be an
> acceptable way to get thi
2006/7/19, Geir Magnusson Jr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
While it's not a critical thing, this seems like something we want to
put to bed. Tim tried taking a run at this for one of these last week,
and I'd like to try again.
Would some number of days of discussion (like 3) plus a vote be an
acceptable
While it's not a critical thing, this seems like something we want to
put to bed. Tim tried taking a run at this for one of these last week,
and I'd like to try again.
Would some number of days of discussion (like 3) plus a vote be an
acceptable way to get this resolved?
geir
--
10 matches
Mail list logo
