>> There's a 2.0 jar sitting right on the download site, and we're using >> it because of various issues with the ancient code in the 1.0.5 >> release. It's been many moons since a refresh was put out, so I took >> what we could get. > > I know.. it's terrible at this point.. because I am too unfamiliar with > the present code to do a proper release because of various > compatibility and testing issues.. The new JSR105 code that is taking > a lot longer than I hoped for :(
I am almost at the point where I can do a C++ release for 1.1. I spent the weekend cleaning up the OpenSSL code so that it will work with 0.9.6. So my question to the list - I think we need to do a Java release as well. Rather than call C++ and Java "1.1 beta" or somesuch, would people be OK if we released version 1.1 of each. The Signature code will be fully supported (thus I am reluctant to call the releases "beta"). However we will mark the encryption code as "beta" and subject to change between now and 1.2. That way we get a release out with some of the bug-fixes for signatures in it (which is thus more stable), and we get the encryption stuff moving. > >>> Where are you getting this from? >> >> http://www.apache.org/dist/xml/security/java-library/ > > Berin? Was this Christian's going away present? I can't recall a 2.0 > release? Not sure. Will try to backtrack it tonight. Cheers, Berin
