[Cryptography Team] Initial package factoring complete (was:Re:some more repository things)

[Ron Teitelbaum]

I answered my own question about ThirtyTwoBitRegister, and moved it to
Cryptography-Core

Ron

-----Original Message-----
From: cryptography-bounces at lists.squeakfoundation.org
[mailto:cryptography-bounces at lists.squeakfoundation.org] On Behalf Of Ron
Teitelbaum
Sent: Friday, October 28, 2005 3:22 PM
To: 'Cryptography Team Development List'
Subject: RE: [Cryptography Team] Initial package factoring complete
(was:Re:some more repository things)

Chris,

Is there a way to push your version 3 to a version 6 to remove ambiguity?  I
loaded my changes to make SHA256 work, including a change to
ThirtyTwoBitRegister I included that is a category *Cryptography-SHA256-..."
Was that what you were intending or should that additional change have gone
somewhere else?  Should we delete the support package?

Hans-Martin, 
Also I fixed errors in the test package, so now only the DES primitive error
is left.  Were you able to work on that, how's it going?

All,
I'm about half way through the ASN.1 documentation.  My thoughts so far are
to attempt a full implementation because there are other pieces of this that
I need on my own project.

Ron

-----Original Message-----
From: cryptography-bounces at lists.squeakfoundation.org
[mailto:cryptography-bounces at lists.squeakfoundation.org] On Behalf Of Chris
Muller
Sent: Monday, October 24, 2005 12:41 PM
To: cryptography at lists.squeakfoundation.org
Subject: [Cryptography Team] Initial package factoring complete (was:
Re:some more repository things)

> > Are you sure this is a safe thing to do?  My understanding is Monticello
> treats
> > the two-part category names as:
> >
> >   PackageName-Category name
> >
> Not if you start adding packages that are named 'Package-Name' ;)

>From this I gather your answer is "yes" this is what you want to do.  I
suppose
you have a lot more confidence in the tools than I do.  I think we will get
bit
by this someday, but I have nevertheless done what you want.  We now have
all
separate algorithm packages.  However, I decided against Monticello prereqs;
one change to Base and you suddenly have to resave *eleven* packages, and we
all know how buggy prereqs are.  But I'll go any direction the team wants to
on
this..

I follwed hmm's lead on removing ASN1Constants pool dictionary, it was
causing
a load warning, but not sure whether it was needed or not.  I know nothing
about ASN1.  Further, I noticed some of the base-class extensions named
"decodeAsn1Der" were also used by DSA.  Therefore, ALL ASN1 extensions are
in
the CryptographyBase package.  Someone who knows about ASN1 should clean
this
up.

Remember, you need to load CryptographBase-cmm.3.mcz, NOT version 5.  Also,
Cryptography-Support is not needed.

After you load Base.3, then load each algorithm-specific package and,
finally,
the Tests package.  15 of 18 of the tests pass, just as if I load
Cryptography
0.3 from SqueakMap.

 - Chris
_______________________________________________
Cryptography mailing list
Cryptography at lists.squeakfoundation.org
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cryptography


_______________________________________________
Cryptography mailing list
Cryptography at lists.squeakfoundation.org
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cryptography