OK, thanks, I will have a look. On 20 Jun 2014, at 10:56, François Stephany <[email protected]> wrote:
> Max, > > Yes, it's usable as the SHA1 package already there (without HMAC so). I'm no > expert in those stuff but I don't get "SHA256 base implementation". Someone > with more knowledge can probably tell ;) > > Sven, > > The bare minimum to load it is: > > Gofer it > smalltalkhubUser: 'JanVanDeSandt' project: 'Cloudfork'; > package: 'Cloudfork-Common'; > package: 'Cloudfork-Pharo-Platform'; > load. > > The implementation is in Cloudfork-Pharo-Platform. > > > > On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 6:20 PM, Sven Van Caekenberghe <[email protected]> wrote: > I want to have a look, if you tell me where to look... > > On 19 Jun 2014, at 18:03, Max Leske <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > On 19.06.2014, at 17:59, François Stephany <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > >> Does it make sense from a license point of view and practical point of > >> view to include the CloudFork HMAC-SHA256 implementation (CFSH256 class) > >> in the System-Hashing package (in where there's already SHA1 and MD5) ? > > > > Can Cloudfork HMAC-SHA256 be easily parameterized with, say, an SHA256 base > > implementation? Or does it require extra stuff? In the former case I > > probably wouldn’t add it. In the latter case it’s open for discussion. > > Personally, I think it belongs into a separate package, not into > > System-Hashing. > > > > Cheers, > > Max > > >
