This is a request for comment on consolidating the Cryptography library for a general release. What I mean by that is consolidating to a single Monticello package, that would allow users to one-click load the basic library. Currently there is an implicit load order which most users don't know. We still don't have Configuration support so that isn't a solution right now.
If this idea is supported, I suggest we look at all the packages and decide which are "in", then generate the Cryptography package with these packages loaded.
Those packages that are not included, like Cryptography-SMIME for instance, should really be renamed to not have the Cryptography- prefix. The old versions can be deleted to keep things clean.
Those packages that are selected, and are determined to be complete, could be deleted as independent packages and we would just rely on them being in the consolidated package and develop there when needed. After this first step is completed, we could reassign the classes to a more compact categorization.
Below is a list of the packages. Please vote and if your vote is yes, what are your package recommendations as described below.
Rob
Packages: Those with a '*' in front are my suggestions as to which is to be included in Cryptography. Those with a '!' in front are my suggestions as to which should be renamed away from Cryptography-. Those with a '+++' are candidates for deletion, since they have been superseded.
* Cryptography-ARC2 * Cryptography-ASN1 * Cryptography-Core * Cryptography-DES * Cryptography-DSA * Cryptography-ElGamal * Cryptography-MD4 * Cryptography-MD5 * Cryptography-PKCS12 * Cryptography-RC4 * Cryptography-RSA * Cryptography-RandomAndPrime * Cryptography-Rijndael * Cryptography-SHA1 * Cryptography-SHA256 ! Cryptography-SMIME ! Cryptography-SSL * Cryptography-Tests * Cryptography-X509 +++Fortuna (this exists in RandomAndPrime) ! Cryptography-MSCerts +++Cryptography-TLS (this is superseded by SSL) OpenPGP
Hi Rob,
Very cool about the SMIME work I'm looking forward to working with it.
There is some working and useful code in MSCerts and I need to review TLS for any dependencies. Also the work that I started which integrates SSL with Kom is there, I think in the tls package, so as long as we don't delete them I'm ok with renaming them. Were you planning on moving SSL and SMIME into another repository or just renaming them within the Cryptography repository?
We originally separated them out so that someone could select which components they needed. I agree with you that this introduced some load dependencies. Also the size of the classes themselves is not large enough to really warrant their own packages. We probably introduced more problems and confusion then we solved. So I agree with your suggestion and would support having one cryptography package with all the component algorithms, and then separate packages for applications. I should also move my KeyHolder and my PasswordSaltAndStretch somewhere. I'm not sure they are components but they are not really applications either. Suggestions?
Ron
-----Original Message----- From: Robert Withers
This is a request for comment on consolidating the Cryptography library for a general release. What I mean by that is consolidating to a single Monticello package, that would allow users to one-click load the basic library. Currently there is an implicit load order which most users don't know. We still don't have Configuration support so that isn't a solution right now.
If this idea is supported, I suggest we look at all the packages and decide which are "in", then generate the Cryptography package with these packages loaded.
Those packages that are not included, like Cryptography-SMIME for instance, should really be renamed to not have the Cryptography- prefix. The old versions can be deleted to keep things clean.
Those packages that are selected, and are determined to be complete, could be deleted as independent packages and we would just rely on them being in the consolidated package and develop there when needed. After this first step is completed, we could reassign the classes to a more compact categorization.
Below is a list of the packages. Please vote and if your vote is yes, what are your package recommendations as described below.
Rob
Packages: Those with a '*' in front are my suggestions as to which is to be included in Cryptography. Those with a '!' in front are my suggestions as to which should be renamed away from Cryptography-. Those with a '+++' are candidates for deletion, since they have been superseded.
- Cryptography-ARC2
- Cryptography-ASN1
- Cryptography-Core
- Cryptography-DES
- Cryptography-DSA
- Cryptography-ElGamal
- Cryptography-MD4
- Cryptography-MD5
- Cryptography-PKCS12
- Cryptography-RC4
- Cryptography-RSA
- Cryptography-RandomAndPrime
- Cryptography-Rijndael
- Cryptography-SHA1
- Cryptography-SHA256
! Cryptography-SMIME ! Cryptography-SSL
- Cryptography-Tests
- Cryptography-X509
+++Fortuna (this exists in RandomAndPrime) ! Cryptography-MSCerts +++Cryptography-TLS (this is superseded by SSL) OpenPGP
Cryptography mailing list Cryptography@lists.squeakfoundation.org http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cryptography
Hi Ron,
On Apr 20, 2007, at 7:53 PM, Ron Teitelbaum wrote:
Hi Rob,
Very cool about the SMIME work I'm looking forward to working with it.
I have one last bug to fix for signatures.
There is some working and useful code in MSCerts and I need to review TLS for any dependencies. Also the work that I started which integrates SSL with Kom is there, I think in the tls package, so as long as we don't delete them I'm ok with renaming them. Were you planning on moving SSL and SMIME into another repository or just renaming them within the Cryptography repository?
I was just going to re-categorize them and republish them as SSL and SMIME, but leave them in this repository. I have already done this locally for SMIME, but I am waiting for the go ahead on the consolidation.
We originally separated them out so that someone could select which components they needed.
I thought it was done to assist with concurrent development, but most of it is stable now.
I agree with you that this introduced some load dependencies. Also the size of the classes themselves is not large enough to really warrant their own packages. We probably introduced more problems and confusion then we solved. So I agree with your suggestion and would support having one cryptography package with all the component algorithms, and then separate packages for applications. I should also move my KeyHolder and my PasswordSaltAndStretch somewhere. I'm not sure they are components but they are not really applications either. Suggestions?
I think something in RC2 or something uses KeyHolder, et al. Let's leave them in.
So you agree with my package allocation?
Rob
Ron
-----Original Message----- From: Robert Withers
This is a request for comment on consolidating the Cryptography library for a general release. What I mean by that is consolidating to a single Monticello package, that would allow users to one-click load the basic library. Currently there is an implicit load order which most users don't know. We still don't have Configuration support so that isn't a solution right now.
If this idea is supported, I suggest we look at all the packages and decide which are "in", then generate the Cryptography package with these packages loaded.
Those packages that are not included, like Cryptography-SMIME for instance, should really be renamed to not have the Cryptography- prefix. The old versions can be deleted to keep things clean.
Those packages that are selected, and are determined to be complete, could be deleted as independent packages and we would just rely on them being in the consolidated package and develop there when needed. After this first step is completed, we could reassign the classes to a more compact categorization.
Below is a list of the packages. Please vote and if your vote is yes, what are your package recommendations as described below.
Rob
Packages: Those with a '*' in front are my suggestions as to which is to be included in Cryptography. Those with a '!' in front are my suggestions as to which should be renamed away from Cryptography-. Those with a '+++' are candidates for deletion, since they have been superseded.
- Cryptography-ARC2
- Cryptography-ASN1
- Cryptography-Core
- Cryptography-DES
- Cryptography-DSA
- Cryptography-ElGamal
- Cryptography-MD4
- Cryptography-MD5
- Cryptography-PKCS12
- Cryptography-RC4
- Cryptography-RSA
- Cryptography-RandomAndPrime
- Cryptography-Rijndael
- Cryptography-SHA1
- Cryptography-SHA256
! Cryptography-SMIME ! Cryptography-SSL
- Cryptography-Tests
- Cryptography-X509
+++Fortuna (this exists in RandomAndPrime) ! Cryptography-MSCerts +++Cryptography-TLS (this is superseded by SSL) OpenPGP
Cryptography mailing list Cryptography@lists.squeakfoundation.org http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ cryptography
Cryptography mailing list Cryptography@lists.squeakfoundation.org http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ cryptography
I agree that there is no need to have separate packages for cryptography. Our original goal was to allow separate base algorithms to be loaded individually but there have already been a number of problems with dependencies, especially the need to load MD5 before other packages. I agree with your assessment, and baring no other objections from the team, I would support consolidating base algorithms into Cryptography, and applications into separate packages.
Ron
-----Original Message----- From: Robert Withers [mailto:reefedjib@yahoo.com] Sent: Saturday, April 21, 2007 11:31 AM To: Ron@USMedRec.com; Cryptography Team Development List Subject: Re: [Cryptography Team] RFC: Consolidating the Cryptography library fora general release
Hi Ron,
On Apr 20, 2007, at 7:53 PM, Ron Teitelbaum wrote:
Hi Rob,
Very cool about the SMIME work I'm looking forward to working with it.
I have one last bug to fix for signatures.
There is some working and useful code in MSCerts and I need to review TLS for any dependencies. Also the work that I started which integrates SSL with Kom is there, I think in the tls package, so as long as we don't delete them I'm ok with renaming them. Were you planning on moving SSL and SMIME into another repository or just renaming them within the Cryptography repository?
I was just going to re-categorize them and republish them as SSL and SMIME, but leave them in this repository. I have already done this locally for SMIME, but I am waiting for the go ahead on the consolidation.
We originally separated them out so that someone could select which components they needed.
I thought it was done to assist with concurrent development, but most of it is stable now.
I agree with you that this introduced some load dependencies. Also the size of the classes themselves is not large enough to really warrant their own packages. We probably introduced more problems and confusion then we solved. So I agree with your suggestion and would support having one cryptography package with all the component algorithms, and then separate packages for applications. I should also move my KeyHolder and my PasswordSaltAndStretch somewhere. I'm not sure they are components but they are not really applications either. Suggestions?
I think something in RC2 or something uses KeyHolder, et al. Let's leave them in.
So you agree with my package allocation?
Rob
Ron
-----Original Message----- From: Robert Withers
This is a request for comment on consolidating the Cryptography library for a general release. What I mean by that is consolidating to a single Monticello package, that would allow users to one-click load the basic library. Currently there is an implicit load order which most users don't know. We still don't have Configuration support so that isn't a solution right now.
If this idea is supported, I suggest we look at all the packages and decide which are "in", then generate the Cryptography package with these packages loaded.
Those packages that are not included, like Cryptography-SMIME for instance, should really be renamed to not have the Cryptography- prefix. The old versions can be deleted to keep things clean.
Those packages that are selected, and are determined to be complete, could be deleted as independent packages and we would just rely on them being in the consolidated package and develop there when needed. After this first step is completed, we could reassign the classes to a more compact categorization.
Below is a list of the packages. Please vote and if your vote is yes, what are your package recommendations as described below.
Rob
Packages: Those with a '*' in front are my suggestions as to which is to be included in Cryptography. Those with a '!' in front are my suggestions as to which should be renamed away from Cryptography-. Those with a '+++' are candidates for deletion, since they have been superseded.
- Cryptography-ARC2
- Cryptography-ASN1
- Cryptography-Core
- Cryptography-DES
- Cryptography-DSA
- Cryptography-ElGamal
- Cryptography-MD4
- Cryptography-MD5
- Cryptography-PKCS12
- Cryptography-RC4
- Cryptography-RSA
- Cryptography-RandomAndPrime
- Cryptography-Rijndael
- Cryptography-SHA1
- Cryptography-SHA256
! Cryptography-SMIME ! Cryptography-SSL
- Cryptography-Tests
- Cryptography-X509
+++Fortuna (this exists in RandomAndPrime) ! Cryptography-MSCerts +++Cryptography-TLS (this is superseded by SSL) OpenPGP
Cryptography mailing list Cryptography@lists.squeakfoundation.org http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ cryptography
Cryptography mailing list Cryptography@lists.squeakfoundation.org http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ cryptography
2007/4/21, Robert Withers reefedjib@yahoo.com:
This is a request for comment on consolidating the Cryptography library for a general release. What I mean by that is consolidating to a single Monticello package, that would allow users to one-click load the basic library. Currently there is an implicit load order which most users don't know. We still don't have Configuration support so that isn't a solution right now.
What's the problem there? If you can load it with Monticello it should be no problem to have a Configuration Map for it. I could even build you one. Just tell me what you want in and in which order.
Cheers Philippe
If this idea is supported, I suggest we look at all the packages and decide which are "in", then generate the Cryptography package with these packages loaded.
Those packages that are not included, like Cryptography-SMIME for instance, should really be renamed to not have the Cryptography- prefix. The old versions can be deleted to keep things clean.
Those packages that are selected, and are determined to be complete, could be deleted as independent packages and we would just rely on them being in the consolidated package and develop there when needed. After this first step is completed, we could reassign the classes to a more compact categorization.
Below is a list of the packages. Please vote and if your vote is yes, what are your package recommendations as described below.
Rob
Packages: Those with a '*' in front are my suggestions as to which is to be included in Cryptography. Those with a '!' in front are my suggestions as to which should be renamed away from Cryptography-. Those with a '+++' are candidates for deletion, since they have been superseded.
- Cryptography-ARC2
- Cryptography-ASN1
- Cryptography-Core
- Cryptography-DES
- Cryptography-DSA
- Cryptography-ElGamal
- Cryptography-MD4
- Cryptography-MD5
- Cryptography-PKCS12
- Cryptography-RC4
- Cryptography-RSA
- Cryptography-RandomAndPrime
- Cryptography-Rijndael
- Cryptography-SHA1
- Cryptography-SHA256
! Cryptography-SMIME ! Cryptography-SSL
- Cryptography-Tests
- Cryptography-X509
+++Fortuna (this exists in RandomAndPrime) ! Cryptography-MSCerts +++Cryptography-TLS (this is superseded by SSL) OpenPGP
Cryptography mailing list Cryptography@lists.squeakfoundation.org http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cryptography
Hi Philippe,
I hadn't realized that Configurations had been fixed in 3.9. They were broken badly in 3.8. This would certainly be a solution to load the various Crypto packages, and it would have the advantage of allowing people to load a smaller subset for constrained devices. I'll take you up on you offer to build a Configuration file for us. Is it possible to nest one configuration inside of another? If I build a SSL configuration, I would want to load the Cryptography configuration with it. O is this what Universes will deliver to us. Slightly confused.
Here is my in-order list of packages for the Cryptography Configuration:
Cryptography-Core Cryptography-ARC2 Cryptography-RC4 Cryptography-MD4 Cryptography-MD5 Cryptography-SHA1 Cryptography-SHA256 Cryptography-DES Cryptography-DSA Cryptography-RSA Cryptography-ElGamal Cryptography-Rijndael Cryptography-RandomAndPrime Cryptography-ASN1 Cryptography-X509 Cryptography-PKCS12 Cryptography-Tests
cheers, Rob
On Apr 21, 2007, at 8:55 AM, Philippe Marschall wrote:
2007/4/21, Robert Withers reefedjib@yahoo.com:
This is a request for comment on consolidating the Cryptography library for a general release. What I mean by that is consolidating to a single Monticello package, that would allow users to one-click load the basic library. Currently there is an implicit load order which most users don't know. We still don't have Configuration support so that isn't a solution right now.
What's the problem there? If you can load it with Monticello it should be no problem to have a Configuration Map for it. I could even build you one. Just tell me what you want in and in which order.
Cheers Philippe
If this idea is supported, I suggest we look at all the packages and decide which are "in", then generate the Cryptography package with these packages loaded.
Those packages that are not included, like Cryptography-SMIME for instance, should really be renamed to not have the Cryptography- prefix. The old versions can be deleted to keep things clean.
Those packages that are selected, and are determined to be complete, could be deleted as independent packages and we would just rely on them being in the consolidated package and develop there when needed. After this first step is completed, we could reassign the classes to a more compact categorization.
Below is a list of the packages. Please vote and if your vote is yes, what are your package recommendations as described below.
Rob
Packages: Those with a '*' in front are my suggestions as to which is to be included in Cryptography. Those with a '!' in front are my suggestions as to which should be renamed away from Cryptography-. Those with a '+++' are candidates for deletion, since they have been superseded.
- Cryptography-ARC2
- Cryptography-ASN1
- Cryptography-Core
- Cryptography-DES
- Cryptography-DSA
- Cryptography-ElGamal
- Cryptography-MD4
- Cryptography-MD5
- Cryptography-PKCS12
- Cryptography-RC4
- Cryptography-RSA
- Cryptography-RandomAndPrime
- Cryptography-Rijndael
- Cryptography-SHA1
- Cryptography-SHA256
! Cryptography-SMIME ! Cryptography-SSL
- Cryptography-Tests
- Cryptography-X509
+++Fortuna (this exists in RandomAndPrime) ! Cryptography-MSCerts +++Cryptography-TLS (this is superseded by SSL) OpenPGP
Cryptography mailing list Cryptography@lists.squeakfoundation.org http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ cryptography
Cryptography mailing list Cryptography@lists.squeakfoundation.org http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ cryptography
2007/4/21, Robert Withers reefedjib@yahoo.com:
Hi Philippe,
I hadn't realized that Configurations had been fixed in 3.9. They were broken badly in 3.8.
They don't work out of the box in 3.9, you're right about that. I don't know what the situation on 3.8.1 is.
This would certainly be a solution to load the various Crypto packages, and it would have the advantage of allowing people to load a smaller subset for constrained devices. I'll take you up on you offer to build a Configuration file for us. Is it possible to nest one configuration inside of another?
No.
If I build a SSL configuration, I would want to load the Cryptography configuration with it. O is this what Universes will deliver to us. Slightly confused.
Universes supports dependencies afaik.
Here is my in-order list of packages for the Cryptography Configuration:
Cryptography-Core Cryptography-ARC2 Cryptography-RC4 Cryptography-MD4 Cryptography-MD5 Cryptography-SHA1 Cryptography-SHA256 Cryptography-DES Cryptography-DSA Cryptography-RSA Cryptography-ElGamal Cryptography-Rijndael Cryptography-RandomAndPrime Cryptography-ASN1 Cryptography-X509 Cryptography-PKCS12 Cryptography-Tests
http://mc.lukas-renggli.ch/spielverderber/Cryptography-pmm.1.mcm (I don't have the commit right for the cryptography project on SqS)
Cheers Philippe
cheers, Rob
On Apr 21, 2007, at 8:55 AM, Philippe Marschall wrote:
2007/4/21, Robert Withers reefedjib@yahoo.com:
This is a request for comment on consolidating the Cryptography library for a general release. What I mean by that is consolidating to a single Monticello package, that would allow users to one-click load the basic library. Currently there is an implicit load order which most users don't know. We still don't have Configuration support so that isn't a solution right now.
What's the problem there? If you can load it with Monticello it should be no problem to have a Configuration Map for it. I could even build you one. Just tell me what you want in and in which order.
Cheers Philippe
If this idea is supported, I suggest we look at all the packages and decide which are "in", then generate the Cryptography package with these packages loaded.
Those packages that are not included, like Cryptography-SMIME for instance, should really be renamed to not have the Cryptography- prefix. The old versions can be deleted to keep things clean.
Those packages that are selected, and are determined to be complete, could be deleted as independent packages and we would just rely on them being in the consolidated package and develop there when needed. After this first step is completed, we could reassign the classes to a more compact categorization.
Below is a list of the packages. Please vote and if your vote is yes, what are your package recommendations as described below.
Rob
Packages: Those with a '*' in front are my suggestions as to which is to be included in Cryptography. Those with a '!' in front are my suggestions as to which should be renamed away from Cryptography-. Those with a '+++' are candidates for deletion, since they have been superseded.
- Cryptography-ARC2
- Cryptography-ASN1
- Cryptography-Core
- Cryptography-DES
- Cryptography-DSA
- Cryptography-ElGamal
- Cryptography-MD4
- Cryptography-MD5
- Cryptography-PKCS12
- Cryptography-RC4
- Cryptography-RSA
- Cryptography-RandomAndPrime
- Cryptography-Rijndael
- Cryptography-SHA1
- Cryptography-SHA256
! Cryptography-SMIME ! Cryptography-SSL
- Cryptography-Tests
- Cryptography-X509
+++Fortuna (this exists in RandomAndPrime) ! Cryptography-MSCerts +++Cryptography-TLS (this is superseded by SSL) OpenPGP
Cryptography mailing list Cryptography@lists.squeakfoundation.org http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ cryptography
Cryptography mailing list Cryptography@lists.squeakfoundation.org http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ cryptography
Cryptography mailing list Cryptography@lists.squeakfoundation.org http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cryptography
On Apr 21, 2007, at 10:26 AM, Philippe Marschall wrote:
2007/4/21, Robert Withers reefedjib@yahoo.com:
Hi Philippe,
I hadn't realized that Configurations had been fixed in 3.9. They were broken badly in 3.8.
They don't work out of the box in 3.9, you're right about that. I don't know what the situation on 3.8.1 is.
I'm sorry but I don't think it is suitable to deploy Cryptography using a mechanism that does not work out of the box. It has been two cycles (3.8 and 3.9) where this problem has existed without being repaired. We are trying to arrive at a solution to allow users to load Cryptography out of the box, so they can start using applications that are built on top of Cryptography, like SMIME and SSL. I think consolidating the library makes perfect sense, and if someone needs a slimmed down version we can create one for them. I'm sorry if a little frustration is coming through, but Monticello is a fantastic product that I use everyday, but we have tried to notify people of the problem with Configurations and nothing was done. I would love to use it if it worked out of the box in 3.9. Maybe a fix could be added to 3.10.
This would certainly be a solution to load the various Crypto packages, and it would have the advantage of allowing people to load a smaller subset for constrained devices. I'll take you up on you offer to build a Configuration file for us. Is it possible to nest one configuration inside of another?
No.
Bummer.
If I build a SSL configuration, I would want to load the Cryptography configuration with it. O is this what Universes will deliver to us. Slightly confused.
Universes supports dependencies afaik.
Maybe this is now the solution, to add all packages to a Universe. I wonder if Universes can be nested.
Here is my in-order list of packages for the Cryptography Configuration:
Cryptography-Core Cryptography-ARC2 Cryptography-RC4 Cryptography-MD4 Cryptography-MD5 Cryptography-SHA1 Cryptography-SHA256 Cryptography-DES Cryptography-DSA Cryptography-RSA Cryptography-ElGamal Cryptography-Rijndael Cryptography-RandomAndPrime Cryptography-ASN1 Cryptography-X509 Cryptography-PKCS12 Cryptography-Tests
http://mc.lukas-renggli.ch/spielverderber/Cryptography-pmm.1.mcm (I don't have the commit right for the cryptography project on SqS)
I tried but I couldn't load it. Where is the patch for Configurations?
thanks and cheers, Rob
Cheers Philippe
cheers, Rob
On Apr 21, 2007, at 8:55 AM, Philippe Marschall wrote:
2007/4/21, Robert Withers reefedjib@yahoo.com:
This is a request for comment on consolidating the Cryptography library for a general release. What I mean by that is
consolidating
to a single Monticello package, that would allow users to one-
click
load the basic library. Currently there is an implicit load order which most users don't know. We still don't have Configuration support so that isn't a solution right now.
What's the problem there? If you can load it with Monticello it
should
be no problem to have a Configuration Map for it. I could even
build
you one. Just tell me what you want in and in which order.
Cheers Philippe
If this idea is supported, I suggest we look at all the
packages and
decide which are "in", then generate the Cryptography package with these packages loaded.
Those packages that are not included, like Cryptography-SMIME for instance, should really be renamed to not have the Cryptography- prefix. The old versions can be deleted to keep things clean.
Those packages that are selected, and are determined to be
complete,
could be deleted as independent packages and we would just rely on them being in the consolidated package and develop there when needed. After this first step is completed, we could reassign the classes to a more compact categorization.
Below is a list of the packages. Please vote and if your vote is yes, what are your package recommendations as described below.
Rob
Packages: Those with a '*' in front are my suggestions as to which is to be included in Cryptography. Those with a '!' in front are my suggestions as to which should be renamed away from Cryptography-. Those with a '+++' are candidates for deletion, since they have
been
superseded.
- Cryptography-ARC2
- Cryptography-ASN1
- Cryptography-Core
- Cryptography-DES
- Cryptography-DSA
- Cryptography-ElGamal
- Cryptography-MD4
- Cryptography-MD5
- Cryptography-PKCS12
- Cryptography-RC4
- Cryptography-RSA
- Cryptography-RandomAndPrime
- Cryptography-Rijndael
- Cryptography-SHA1
- Cryptography-SHA256
! Cryptography-SMIME ! Cryptography-SSL
- Cryptography-Tests
- Cryptography-X509
+++Fortuna (this exists in RandomAndPrime) ! Cryptography-MSCerts +++Cryptography-TLS (this is superseded by SSL) OpenPGP
Cryptography mailing list Cryptography@lists.squeakfoundation.org http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ cryptography
Cryptography mailing list Cryptography@lists.squeakfoundation.org http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ cryptography
Cryptography mailing list Cryptography@lists.squeakfoundation.org http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ cryptography
Cryptography mailing list Cryptography@lists.squeakfoundation.org http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ cryptography
2007/4/21, Robert Withers reefedjib@yahoo.com:
On Apr 21, 2007, at 10:26 AM, Philippe Marschall wrote:
2007/4/21, Robert Withers reefedjib@yahoo.com:
Hi Philippe,
I hadn't realized that Configurations had been fixed in 3.9. They were broken badly in 3.8.
They don't work out of the box in 3.9, you're right about that. I don't know what the situation on 3.8.1 is.
I'm sorry but I don't think it is suitable to deploy Cryptography using a mechanism that does not work out of the box. It has been two cycles (3.8 and 3.9) where this problem has existed without being repaired. We are trying to arrive at a solution to allow users to load Cryptography out of the box, so they can start using applications that are built on top of Cryptography, like SMIME and SSL. I think consolidating the library makes perfect sense, and if someone needs a slimmed down version we can create one for them. I'm sorry if a little frustration is coming through, but Monticello is a fantastic product that I use everyday, but we have tried to notify people of the problem with Configurations and nothing was done. I would love to use it if it worked out of the box in 3.9. Maybe a fix could be added to 3.10.
You don't need to tell me, I'm neither maintainer of Monticello (yes Monticello has a maintainer) or Monticello Configurations neither am I in the release team. I'm just submitting patches.
This would certainly be a solution to load the various Crypto packages, and it would have the advantage of allowing people to load a smaller subset for constrained devices. I'll take you up on you offer to build a Configuration file for us. Is it possible to nest one configuration inside of another?
No.
Bummer.
If I build a SSL configuration, I would want to load the Cryptography configuration with it. O is this what Universes will deliver to us. Slightly confused.
Universes supports dependencies afaik.
Maybe this is now the solution, to add all packages to a Universe. I wonder if Universes can be nested.
I don't know enough about Universes.
Here is my in-order list of packages for the Cryptography Configuration:
Cryptography-Core Cryptography-ARC2 Cryptography-RC4 Cryptography-MD4 Cryptography-MD5 Cryptography-SHA1 Cryptography-SHA256 Cryptography-DES Cryptography-DSA Cryptography-RSA Cryptography-ElGamal Cryptography-Rijndael Cryptography-RandomAndPrime Cryptography-ASN1 Cryptography-X509 Cryptography-PKCS12 Cryptography-Tests
http://mc.lukas-renggli.ch/spielverderber/Cryptography-pmm.1.mcm (I don't have the commit right for the cryptography project on SqS)
I tried but I couldn't load it. Where is the patch for Configurations?
The main problem is actually not Configurations but Monticello. There are about three (maybe now four versions from which you can pick:
http://bugs.squeak.org/view.php?id=5217 http://bugs.squeak.org/view.php?id=4991 http://www.squeaksource.com/Trike.html
For 3.8 you might want to the one from the Impara repository: http://source.impara.de/mc
Cheers Philippe
thanks and cheers, Rob
Cheers Philippe
cheers, Rob
On Apr 21, 2007, at 8:55 AM, Philippe Marschall wrote:
2007/4/21, Robert Withers reefedjib@yahoo.com:
This is a request for comment on consolidating the Cryptography library for a general release. What I mean by that is
consolidating
to a single Monticello package, that would allow users to one-
click
load the basic library. Currently there is an implicit load order which most users don't know. We still don't have Configuration support so that isn't a solution right now.
What's the problem there? If you can load it with Monticello it
should
be no problem to have a Configuration Map for it. I could even
build
you one. Just tell me what you want in and in which order.
Cheers Philippe
If this idea is supported, I suggest we look at all the
packages and
decide which are "in", then generate the Cryptography package with these packages loaded.
Those packages that are not included, like Cryptography-SMIME for instance, should really be renamed to not have the Cryptography- prefix. The old versions can be deleted to keep things clean.
Those packages that are selected, and are determined to be
complete,
could be deleted as independent packages and we would just rely on them being in the consolidated package and develop there when needed. After this first step is completed, we could reassign the classes to a more compact categorization.
Below is a list of the packages. Please vote and if your vote is yes, what are your package recommendations as described below.
Rob
Packages: Those with a '*' in front are my suggestions as to which is to be included in Cryptography. Those with a '!' in front are my suggestions as to which should be renamed away from Cryptography-. Those with a '+++' are candidates for deletion, since they have
been
superseded.
- Cryptography-ARC2
- Cryptography-ASN1
- Cryptography-Core
- Cryptography-DES
- Cryptography-DSA
- Cryptography-ElGamal
- Cryptography-MD4
- Cryptography-MD5
- Cryptography-PKCS12
- Cryptography-RC4
- Cryptography-RSA
- Cryptography-RandomAndPrime
- Cryptography-Rijndael
- Cryptography-SHA1
- Cryptography-SHA256
! Cryptography-SMIME ! Cryptography-SSL
- Cryptography-Tests
- Cryptography-X509
+++Fortuna (this exists in RandomAndPrime) ! Cryptography-MSCerts +++Cryptography-TLS (this is superseded by SSL) OpenPGP
Cryptography mailing list Cryptography@lists.squeakfoundation.org http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ cryptography
Cryptography mailing list Cryptography@lists.squeakfoundation.org http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ cryptography
Cryptography mailing list Cryptography@lists.squeakfoundation.org http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ cryptography
Cryptography mailing list Cryptography@lists.squeakfoundation.org http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ cryptography
Cryptography mailing list Cryptography@lists.squeakfoundation.org http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cryptography
Hi Rob, thanks for proposing this. I have long been a proponent of consolidating them but the idea was always met with resistance. I don't know what changed our minds, but I'm happy about it.
I guess I must be the least-concerned in the entire Squeak community about having a little extra code in my images. Most of the crypto packages are just a few bytes so I never understood what the big deal is. Also, if someone was really bothered by it, they could always easily strip whatever individual classes and methods they wanted.
I pretty much agree with your entire list of ones to include/exclude.
Thanks. Chris
On 4/20/07, Robert Withers reefedjib@yahoo.com wrote:
This is a request for comment on consolidating the Cryptography library for a general release. What I mean by that is consolidating to a single Monticello package, that would allow users to one-click load the basic library. Currently there is an implicit load order which most users don't know. We still don't have Configuration support so that isn't a solution right now.
If this idea is supported, I suggest we look at all the packages and decide which are "in", then generate the Cryptography package with these packages loaded.
Those packages that are not included, like Cryptography-SMIME for instance, should really be renamed to not have the Cryptography- prefix. The old versions can be deleted to keep things clean.
Those packages that are selected, and are determined to be complete, could be deleted as independent packages and we would just rely on them being in the consolidated package and develop there when needed. After this first step is completed, we could reassign the classes to a more compact categorization.
Below is a list of the packages. Please vote and if your vote is yes, what are your package recommendations as described below.
Rob
Packages: Those with a '*' in front are my suggestions as to which is to be included in Cryptography. Those with a '!' in front are my suggestions as to which should be renamed away from Cryptography-. Those with a '+++' are candidates for deletion, since they have been superseded.
- Cryptography-ARC2
- Cryptography-ASN1
- Cryptography-Core
- Cryptography-DES
- Cryptography-DSA
- Cryptography-ElGamal
- Cryptography-MD4
- Cryptography-MD5
- Cryptography-PKCS12
- Cryptography-RC4
- Cryptography-RSA
- Cryptography-RandomAndPrime
- Cryptography-Rijndael
- Cryptography-SHA1
- Cryptography-SHA256
! Cryptography-SMIME ! Cryptography-SSL
- Cryptography-Tests
- Cryptography-X509
+++Fortuna (this exists in RandomAndPrime) ! Cryptography-MSCerts +++Cryptography-TLS (this is superseded by SSL) OpenPGP
Cryptography mailing list Cryptography@lists.squeakfoundation.org http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cryptography
cryptography@lists.squeakfoundation.org
-
Chris Muller -
Philippe Marschall -
Robert Withers -
Ron Teitelbaum