I have no more comment. --Max
> On Jan 3, 2016, at 3:48 PM, Sibabrata Sahoo <sibabrata.sa...@oracle.com> > wrote: > > Updated the bug title and description. > > Thanks, > Siba > > -----Original Message----- > From: Wang Weijun > Sent: Sunday, January 03, 2016 1:02 PM > To: Sibabrata Sahoo > Cc: Mandy Chung; Valerie Peng; jigsaw-...@openjdk.java.net; OpenJDK > Subject: Re: [9] RFR:8130360: Add tests to verify 3rd party security > providers if they are in signed/unsigned modular JARs > > Then you don't need to include the "signed/unsigned" words in the bug > description. > > --Max > >> On Jan 3, 2016, at 2:30 PM, Sibabrata Sahoo <sibabrata.sa...@oracle.com> >> wrote: >> >> Hi Max, >> >> The test is for verifying 3rd party security provider in >> classpath/modulepath. I am using an empty provider to check, if the provider >> can be found during runtime when the bundle provided through >> classpath/modulepath with different modular type combination. As the >> provider is empty, I think this is unnecessary to sign the bundle. >> >> Even the same comment[1] was also provided by "Valerie" few days ago and the >> comment was addressed with this webrev, >> >> [1] I think it's somewhat misleading to use the term JCE here as what you >> are testing here is just security provider loading. JCE is more about >> security providers supporting export-controlled services/algorithms. Since >> your provider is just an empty one, I don't think u need to sign it (again, >> it's only for JCE providers). >> >> Thanks, >> Siba >
