Hi Fred,

I see this code was taken from the EncryptedKeyProcessor, so presumably this
> processor needs to be changed, as well.  Even better, let's put these
> processors under a common base, and define the common operation there.
>

Exactly. There is a huge code duplication in those two processors and
ideally they should have a common base. But i thought this is not the best
time to do the refactoring as we are only 1 or 2 weeks away from the
release.

Maybe this is the more reliable operation to use:
>
> http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.5.0/docs/api/org/w3c/dom/Node.html#isEqualNode(org.w3c.dom.Node)<http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.5.0/docs/api/org/w3c/dom/Node.html#isEqualNode%28org.w3c.dom.Node%29>
>

According the documentation "This method tests for equality of nodes, not
sameness (i.e., whether the two nodes are references to the same object)
which can be tested with Node.isSameNode()" , So IMHO what we want to check
is isSameNode instead of isEqualNode. WDYT ?

Next question: Is this blocking for you, and did it show up in RC1 testing?
>  If we do fix it for 1.5.4, I suppose we can fix it on the 1_5_4 branch, and
> then merge to trunk after the release.
>

Yep, this a blocker for Rampart. Anyway it seems that this code has been
there since 3/25/07 but now only it causes a problem as we are actually
using these results for encryption validation recently. So shall I commit
this to both the branch and the trunk ?


> PS> RC1 testing against CXF is going okay, though I've had to make some
> slight modifications to the POM to get things just right.  I'd like to do an
> RC2 (with the BouncyCastle changes, as well), if folks are open to that.
>

Yes, That will be great. Testing against Rampart/Axis2 also going okay
(except for this issue).

regards,
nandana

Reply via email to