There was more to fix and if I'd been able to attend the meeting or been advised up front of the agenda (what happened to the idea of sending a reminder mail to the list dev 24h before the meeting) I would have argued strongly in favour of a stable remoting.
In any case I will be landing JNLPProtocol4 in the near future which has the advantage of being NIO based and offers full TLS encryption of the connection rather than a home-grown encryption protocol On 25 April 2016 at 12:16, Daniel Beck <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On 25.04.2016, at 13:11, Arnaud Héritier <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > I think no. JNLP3 shouldn't land and we should try to propose others > fixes without it. > > I proposed a 'stable' release of remoting in that project meeting, an idea > that wasn't embraced enthusiastically. > > Maybe now that there's more to fix in remoting than just JENKINS-28289? > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Jenkins Developers" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/65BD502C-3E8A-4A51-943E-259A234CCC7F%40beckweb.net > . > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Jenkins Developers" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/CA%2BnPnMw_4DCGdYFO_W2W7HvjBdZWP2JNG3F7fGtELaPTFTcMwQ%40mail.gmail.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
