chibenwa commented on pull request #625:
URL: https://github.com/apache/james-project/pull/625#issuecomment-908011485
> Exactly my first point? Even if we don't want to use it personally, maybe
other wants, so it should still be documented
> somewhere? Somebody using JKS when reading this could wrongly think as
well we removed it... It's confusing?
Two cases:
- `1.` People that upgrades don't need to change anything, it's completly
transparent to them.
- `2.` New people arriving in James will see what are their crypto options.
The default configuration strongly encourage them using PKCS12 so I bet 99%
will use that without further thinking, even more as it is favored nowadays.
Now if they *really* want to be using JKS they will notice the keystore type
speficied their and will supply the `JKS` value there.
Now is what you whish : making the `JKS` value more discoverable with for
instance explicitly documenting the setup of a JKS keystore for `2.` ?
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
