One more small comment:
51 * <li>Check if the returned key pair generator is an instance of the
52 * DSAKeyPairGenerator interface before casting the result to a
I would just say "... instance of DSAKeyPairGenerator before ..."
--Sean
On 11/16/17 7:39 PM, Valerie Peng wrote:
Thanks for the feedback.
I have updated webrev to address your comments:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~valeriep/8182484/webrev.01/
CSR has also been updated and proposed.
Valerie
On 11/14/2017 10:47 AM, Sean Mullan wrote:
On 11/8/17 6:47 PM, Valerie Peng wrote:
Hi, Sean,
I updated the webrev in place - now this change contains only javadoc
update of DSAKeyPairGenerator interface.
CSR has also been updated accordingly. Could you please take a look?
Sure.
35 * DSAKeyPairGenerator, each provider must supply (and document) a
36 * default initialization.
I suggest saying "should" instead of "must" since we can't really
require this to be documented, esp. for a 3rd-party provider. Also I
would say "each provider that implements this interface ...".
52 * DSAKeyPairGenerator, then call one of the {@code initialize}
methods
Slight rewording suggestion: "DSAKeyPairGenerator and calling one of
the {@code initialize} methods"
103 * thrown. It is guaranteed that there will always be
104 * default parameters for modulus lengths of 512, 1024, and
2048 bits.
I guess "guaranteed" is referring to any impl of DSAKeyPairGenerator,
but it is kind of hard to enforce that if you are using a 3rd-party
provider. I think we should consider just removing this sentence
entirely and leaving the requirements up to the implementation. It's
also unusual that we would require 512-bits, and hard-coding that
might make it hard to remove later on. Minimally, I think we should
remove 512.
--Sean
Thanks,
Valerie
On 11/2/2017 6:24 PM, Valerie Peng wrote:
Sean,
Could you help review this RFE below? It's mainly the javadoc update
of java.security.interfaces.DSAKeyPairGenerator which replaces the
1024-bit default value with provider-specific one and removal of the
earlier changes for working around this javadoc limitation. I reused
the wordings from existing security classes.
RFE: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8182484
Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~valeriep/8182484/webrev.00/
CSR: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8190569
Thanks,
Valerie
