On Tue, 9 Apr 2024 23:19:53 GMT, Jonathan Gibbons wrote:
>> Nizar Benalla has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Update copyright year to 2024
>
> [wangweij](https://github.com/wangweij) commented [3 weeks
> ago](https://github
On Mon, 25 Mar 2024 22:51:48 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
>> For context, I am writing tests to check for accurate use of `@since` tags
>> in documentation comments in source code.
>> We're following these rules for now:
>>
>> ### Rule 1: Introduction of New Elements
>>
>> - If an element is new
On Tue, 9 Apr 2024 18:34:52 GMT, Mark Powers wrote:
>> Valerie Peng has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Update to match CSR for disableLegacy -> allowLegacy name change
>
> src/jdk.crypto.cryptoki/share/classes/sun/security/p
On Tue, 9 Apr 2024 18:37:44 GMT, Mark Powers wrote:
> What about testing?
I tested the change manually by changing some behavior to simulate the case.
However, this cannot be done by regression test since NSS does not have legacy
mechanisms.
-
PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/
On Wed, 3 Apr 2024 01:11:47 GMT, Valerie Peng wrote:
> This PR fixes a problem regarding the usage of dlerror() where an earlier
> error message causes a premature error out. Added extra code to clear out
> earlier error message and made minor code refactoring.
>
> No regression test as this c
On Mon, 25 Mar 2024 22:51:48 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
>> For context, I am writing tests to check for accurate use of `@since` tags
>> in documentation comments in source code.
>> We're following these rules for now:
>>
>> ### Rule 1: Introduction of New Elements
>>
>> - If an element is new
On Fri, 5 Apr 2024 06:31:16 GMT, Julian Waters wrote:
>> I regret not actually addressing the issues with the goto labels in
>> https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/15996, where initialization of locals in
>> sspi were jumped over by gotos to a certain label. I changed the
>> initializations in
On Mon, 1 Apr 2024 17:39:07 GMT, Ben Perez wrote:
> Removed `PrivateKeyUsagePeriod` from method javadoc and added several
> commonly used extensions
This pull request has now been integrated.
Changeset: 316361b9
Author:Ben Perez
Committer: Sean Mullan
URL:
https://git.openjdk.org/
> Removed `PrivateKeyUsagePeriod` from method javadoc and added several
> commonly used extensions
Ben Perez has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit
since the last revision:
Added Authority Information Access OID
-
Changes:
- all: https://git.open
On Tue, 9 Apr 2024 19:59:37 GMT, Ben Perez wrote:
>> Removed `PrivateKeyUsagePeriod` from method javadoc and added several
>> commonly used extensions
>
> Ben Perez has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
> commit since the last revision:
>
> Added Authority Informatio
On Mon, 8 Apr 2024 19:33:25 GMT, Valerie Peng wrote:
>> Existing legacy mechanism check disables mechanism(s) when the support is
>> partial, e.g. supports decryption but not encryption, or supports
>> verification but not signing. Some mechanisms can be used for both
>> encryption/decryption
On 4/9/24 9:24 AM, Simon Bernard wrote:
Thx for detail answers.
Yes. I don't want you to spend months on a contribution only to have
us decide it is not something we want to include in the JDK.
I really appreciate that.
Yes, but PSK introduces security issues that need to be considered. We
On Fri, 22 Mar 2024 22:25:47 GMT, rebarbora-mckvak wrote:
>> This fixes the defect described at
>> https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8313367
>>
>> If the process does not have write permissions, the store is opened as
>> read-only (instead of failing).
>>
>> Please note that permissions to
Thx for detail answers.
Yes. I don't want you to spend months on a contribution only to have
us decide it is not something we want to include in the JDK.
I really appreciate that.
Yes, but PSK introduces security issues that need to be considered. We
would have to be very careful about how we
Hi Simon,
On 4/8/24 10:12 AM, Simon Bernard wrote:
Hi Sean,
Thx for warning me about that.
I understand that maybe this is too soon for contributing code ? and
also that finally this not so sure that you want to integrate (D)TLS
feature that I mentioned previously as Key IoT features.
This PR removes support for the string template feature from the Java compiler
and the Java SE API, as discussed here:
https://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/amber-spec-experts/2024-April/004106.html
-
Commit messages:
- Drop spurious changes
- Merge branch 'master' into template_remo
16 matches
Mail list logo
