Re: [VOTE] xml-sec java 1.3 release?

2005-09-14 Thread Vishal Mahajan 

Vishal Mahajan wrote:


Raul,

I have filed three bugs (with suggested patches) - 36638, 36639, and 
36640, which I found recently.

I'll check-in the fix for each of these tomorrow


Done with the fixes.

Regards,

Vishal


and after that it's +1 from me.

Regards,

Vishal

Raul Benito wrote:


Sorry for the delay calling a vote but I've been really busy with my
day job(deadline approaching) and I wanted to close all bugs before
doing the release (thing that  I manage to do tonight).

But after a waiting time, and with all the bugs closed, I'll think is
time to graduate 1.3RC1 to release status.

What do you thing?

[ ] +1 , OK go ahead.
[ ] +0, [ ] -1, Why we don't do RC2 before.

Regards,

Raul

Re: [VOTE] xml-sec java 1.3 release?

2005-09-14 Thread Sean Mullan 
Although I have reviewed these fixes and they look fine and fairly 
low-risk, I think it probably makes sense to allow a few days (a week?) 
to let others test and make sure there are no regressions. Comments? I'm 
fairly new to the process, but I just think it makes sense to test the 
final bits as much as possible before they are released. What are the 
guidelines? I don't necessarily think we need to cut an RC2, but we 
should at least build an xmlsec.jar and make it available for testing.


--Sean

Vishal Mahajan wrote:

Vishal Mahajan wrote:


Raul,

I have filed three bugs (with suggested patches) - 36638, 36639, and 
36640, which I found recently.

I'll check-in the fix for each of these tomorrow



Done with the fixes.

Regards,

Vishal


and after that it's +1 from me.

Regards,

Vishal

Raul Benito wrote:


Sorry for the delay calling a vote but I've been really busy with my
day job(deadline approaching) and I wanted to close all bugs before
doing the release (thing that  I manage to do tonight).

But after a waiting time, and with all the bugs closed, I'll think is
time to graduate 1.3RC1 to release status.

What do you thing?

[ ] +1 , OK go ahead.
[ ] +0, [ ] -1, Why we don't do RC2 before.

Regards,

Raul

Re: [VOTE] xml-sec java 1.3 release?

2005-09-14 Thread Vishal Mahajan 
I think your suggestion makes complete sense. We should give at least a 
week of testing (after significant check-ins) before an RC goes out and 
probably little more time before for the final release. Thanks for 
bringing this up and hopefully we can incorporate this going forward.


Regards,

Vishal

Sean Mullan wrote:

Although I have reviewed these fixes and they look fine and fairly 
low-risk, I think it probably makes sense to allow a few days (a 
week?) to let others test and make sure there are no regressions. 
Comments? I'm fairly new to the process, but I just think it makes 
sense to test the final bits as much as possible before they are 
released. What are the guidelines? I don't necessarily think we need 
to cut an RC2, but we should at least build an xmlsec.jar and make it 
available for testing.


--Sean

Vishal Mahajan wrote:


Vishal Mahajan wrote:


Raul,

I have filed three bugs (with suggested patches) - 36638, 36639, and 
36640, which I found recently.

I'll check-in the fix for each of these tomorrow




Done with the fixes.

Regards,

Vishal


and after that it's +1 from me.

Regards,

Vishal

Raul Benito wrote:


Sorry for the delay calling a vote but I've been really busy with my
day job(deadline approaching) and I wanted to close all bugs before
doing the release (thing that  I manage to do tonight).

But after a waiting time, and with all the bugs closed, I'll think is
time to graduate 1.3RC1 to release status.

What do you thing?

[ ] +1 , OK go ahead.
[ ] +0, [ ] -1, Why we don't do RC2 before.

Regards,

Raul

Re: [VOTE] xml-sec java 1.3 release?

2005-09-14 Thread Raul Benito 
I was also going to suggest a RC2 jar, for testing.

I'll think that doing a RC jar right now is the best way to test the
changes (There are a lot of people interested in testing that are
afraid of generate themselves a jar).

So hat do you all think if I go ahead and do a RC2.jar and after two
weeks call for another release vote?


Regards,


Raul


On 9/14/05, Vishal Mahajan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I think your suggestion makes complete sense. We should give at least a
> week of testing (after significant check-ins) before an RC goes out and
> probably little more time before for the final release. Thanks for
> bringing this up and hopefully we can incorporate this going forward.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Vishal
> 
> Sean Mullan wrote:
> 
> > Although I have reviewed these fixes and they look fine and fairly
> > low-risk, I think it probably makes sense to allow a few days (a
> > week?) to let others test and make sure there are no regressions.
> > Comments? I'm fairly new to the process, but I just think it makes
> > sense to test the final bits as much as possible before they are
> > released. What are the guidelines? I don't necessarily think we need
> > to cut an RC2, but we should at least build an xmlsec.jar and make it
> > available for testing.
> >
> > --Sean
> >
> > Vishal Mahajan wrote:
> >
> >> Vishal Mahajan wrote:
> >>
> >>> Raul,
> >>>
> >>> I have filed three bugs (with suggested patches) - 36638, 36639, and
> >>> 36640, which I found recently.
> >>> I'll check-in the fix for each of these tomorrow
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Done with the fixes.
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >>
> >> Vishal
> >>
> >>> and after that it's +1 from me.
> >>>
> >>> Regards,
> >>>
> >>> Vishal
> >>>
> >>> Raul Benito wrote:
> >>>
>  Sorry for the delay calling a vote but I've been really busy with my
>  day job(deadline approaching) and I wanted to close all bugs before
>  doing the release (thing that  I manage to do tonight).
> 
>  But after a waiting time, and with all the bugs closed, I'll think is
>  time to graduate 1.3RC1 to release status.
> 
>  What do you thing?
> 
>  [ ] +1 , OK go ahead.
>  [ ] +0, [ ] -1, Why we don't do RC2 before.
> 
>  Regards,
> 
>  Raul
> 
> 
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >
> 
> 
> 


-- 
http://r-bg.com

Re: [VOTE] xml-sec java 1.3 release?

2005-09-14 Thread Davanum Srinivas 
+1 from me.

On 9/14/05, Raul Benito <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I was also going to suggest a RC2 jar, for testing.
> 
> I'll think that doing a RC jar right now is the best way to test the
> changes (There are a lot of people interested in testing that are
> afraid of generate themselves a jar).
> 
> So hat do you all think if I go ahead and do a RC2.jar and after two
> weeks call for another release vote?
> 
> 
> Regards,
> 
> 
> Raul
> 
> 
> On 9/14/05, Vishal Mahajan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I think your suggestion makes complete sense. We should give at least a
> > week of testing (after significant check-ins) before an RC goes out and
> > probably little more time before for the final release. Thanks for
> > bringing this up and hopefully we can incorporate this going forward.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Vishal
> >
> > Sean Mullan wrote:
> >
> > > Although I have reviewed these fixes and they look fine and fairly
> > > low-risk, I think it probably makes sense to allow a few days (a
> > > week?) to let others test and make sure there are no regressions.
> > > Comments? I'm fairly new to the process, but I just think it makes
> > > sense to test the final bits as much as possible before they are
> > > released. What are the guidelines? I don't necessarily think we need
> > > to cut an RC2, but we should at least build an xmlsec.jar and make it
> > > available for testing.
> > >
> > > --Sean
> > >
> > > Vishal Mahajan wrote:
> > >
> > >> Vishal Mahajan wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> Raul,
> > >>>
> > >>> I have filed three bugs (with suggested patches) - 36638, 36639, and
> > >>> 36640, which I found recently.
> > >>> I'll check-in the fix for each of these tomorrow
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Done with the fixes.
> > >>
> > >> Regards,
> > >>
> > >> Vishal
> > >>
> > >>> and after that it's +1 from me.
> > >>>
> > >>> Regards,
> > >>>
> > >>> Vishal
> > >>>
> > >>> Raul Benito wrote:
> > >>>
> >  Sorry for the delay calling a vote but I've been really busy with my
> >  day job(deadline approaching) and I wanted to close all bugs before
> >  doing the release (thing that  I manage to do tonight).
> > 
> >  But after a waiting time, and with all the bugs closed, I'll think is
> >  time to graduate 1.3RC1 to release status.
> > 
> >  What do you thing?
> > 
> >  [ ] +1 , OK go ahead.
> >  [ ] +0, [ ] -1, Why we don't do RC2 before.
> > 
> >  Regards,
> > 
> >  Raul
> > 
> > 
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> 
> 
> --
> http://r-bg.com
> 


-- 
Davanum Srinivas : http://wso2.com/ - Oxygenating The Web Service Platform

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 36638] - Canonicalization of a DocumentFragment node always throws a c14n exception

2005-09-14 Thread bugzilla 
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36638


[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |RESOLVED
 Resolution||FIXED




--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2005-09-14 20:39 ---
Attached patch applied.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 36639] - KeyValue.getPublicKey does not work

2005-09-14 Thread bugzilla 
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36639


[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |RESOLVED
 Resolution||FIXED




--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2005-09-14 20:40 ---
Attached patch applied.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 36640] - Signature verification ignores the inclusive namespaces parameter of a excl c14n ds:CanonicalizationMethod

2005-09-14 Thread bugzilla 
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36640


[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |RESOLVED
 Resolution||FIXED




--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2005-09-14 20:40 ---
Attached patch applied.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

Re: [VOTE] xml-sec java 1.3 release?

2005-09-14 Thread Sean Mullan 

+1

Raul Benito wrote:

I was also going to suggest a RC2 jar, for testing.

I'll think that doing a RC jar right now is the best way to test the
changes (There are a lot of people interested in testing that are
afraid of generate themselves a jar).

So hat do you all think if I go ahead and do a RC2.jar and after two
weeks call for another release vote?


Regards,


Raul


On 9/14/05, Vishal Mahajan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


I think your suggestion makes complete sense. We should give at least a
week of testing (after significant check-ins) before an RC goes out and
probably little more time before for the final release. Thanks for
bringing this up and hopefully we can incorporate this going forward.

Regards,

Vishal

Sean Mullan wrote:



Although I have reviewed these fixes and they look fine and fairly
low-risk, I think it probably makes sense to allow a few days (a
week?) to let others test and make sure there are no regressions.
Comments? I'm fairly new to the process, but I just think it makes
sense to test the final bits as much as possible before they are
released. What are the guidelines? I don't necessarily think we need
to cut an RC2, but we should at least build an xmlsec.jar and make it
available for testing.

--Sean

Vishal Mahajan wrote:



Vishal Mahajan wrote:



Raul,

I have filed three bugs (with suggested patches) - 36638, 36639, and
36640, which I found recently.
I'll check-in the fix for each of these tomorrow




Done with the fixes.

Regards,

Vishal



and after that it's +1 from me.

Regards,

Vishal

Raul Benito wrote:



Sorry for the delay calling a vote but I've been really busy with my
day job(deadline approaching) and I wanted to close all bugs before
doing the release (thing that  I manage to do tonight).

But after a waiting time, and with all the bugs closed, I'll think is
time to graduate 1.3RC1 to release status.

What do you thing?

[ ] +1 , OK go ahead.
[ ] +0, [ ] -1, Why we don't do RC2 before.

Regards,

Raul

Testing the latest CVS

2005-09-14 Thread Davanum Srinivas 
Folks,
With the latest CVS (updated libraries)

JDK1.5 : "ant clean test" works out of the box.
JDK1.4 : "ant clean test" works out of the box.
JDK1.3 : "ant clean test" works after i drop bc jar into jre/lib/ext
and add the entry in java.security (1.3.1_15)

Raul,
Please use the lowest JDK (1.3.1_15) to build the release.

Thanks,
dims

-- 
Davanum Srinivas : http://wso2.com/ - Oxygenating The Web Service Platform

Re: Testing the latest CVS

2005-09-14 Thread Raul Benito 
Sadly java 1.3 is not working in my gentoo amd64.
 I will compile it tomorrow noon with  in java 1.5.0_01.
Do you think is enought or do you think blackdown 1.4.2.02 is better?

Regards,

Raul

On 9/14/05, Davanum Srinivas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Folks,
> With the latest CVS (updated libraries)
> 
> JDK1.5 : "ant clean test" works out of the box.
> JDK1.4 : "ant clean test" works out of the box.
> JDK1.3 : "ant clean test" works after i drop bc jar into jre/lib/ext
> and add the entry in java.security (1.3.1_15)
> 
> Raul,
> Please use the lowest JDK (1.3.1_15) to build the release.
> 
> Thanks,
> dims
> 
> --
> Davanum Srinivas : http://wso2.com/ - Oxygenating The Web Service Platform
> 


-- 
http://r-bg.com

Re: Testing the latest CVS

2005-09-14 Thread Davanum Srinivas 
+1 should be ok.

thanks,
dims

On 9/14/05, Raul Benito <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Sadly java 1.3 is not working in my gentoo amd64.
>  I will compile it tomorrow noon with  source="1.2"/> in java 1.5.0_01.
> Do you think is enought or do you think blackdown 1.4.2.02 is better?
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Raul
> 
> On 9/14/05, Davanum Srinivas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Folks,
> > With the latest CVS (updated libraries)
> >
> > JDK1.5 : "ant clean test" works out of the box.
> > JDK1.4 : "ant clean test" works out of the box.
> > JDK1.3 : "ant clean test" works after i drop bc jar into jre/lib/ext
> > and add the entry in java.security (1.3.1_15)
> >
> > Raul,
> > Please use the lowest JDK (1.3.1_15) to build the release.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > dims
> >
> > --
> > Davanum Srinivas : http://wso2.com/ - Oxygenating The Web Service Platform
> >
> 
> 
> --
> http://r-bg.com
> 


-- 
Davanum Srinivas : http://wso2.com/ - Oxygenating The Web Service Platform