Sean Mullan | 1 Apr 18:54 2011
Picon

Re: importing a local CA certificate into cacerts keystore

Moving to security-dev@...

On 3/31/11 4:11 PM, Kurt Yoder wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> I'm trying to run Apache Archiva using OpenJDK, and authenticating off SSL-protected LDAP. This is
throwing an exception "sun.security.provider.certpath.SunCertPathBuilderException: unable to
find valid certification path to requested target". Since my LDAP server's SSL is signed using my local CA
certificate, I presume this error effectively is telling me I need to import my local CA certificate into
the OpenJDK keystore.
>
>
> Following this reasoning I am attempting to import my root CA, but I can't figure out how to do it. I tried:
>
> keytool -importcert -file /etc/ssl/certs/my-ca.pem -keystore /etc/ssl/certs/java/cacerts
>
> which gives me:
>
> keytool error: java.lang.Exception: Input not an X.509 certificate

This means it can't decode the certificate for some reason.

Try the following:

keytool -v -printcert -file /etc/ssl/certs/my-ca.pem

which should dump a trace of the exception with more info.

--Sean

(Continue reading)

ryenus | 6 Apr 17:42 2011
Picon

declarative getter/setter via annotation


Here is a trivial one, I wonder if it's ok to request for something like
declarative getter/setter to access class fields, namely via annotations 

such as:
 <at> accessor(set,is)
private boolean field1;

AND

 <at> accessor(set,get)
private int filed2;

in case there are multiple fields declared together, all fields should have
getter/setter generated, such as:
 <at> accessor(set,get)
private String field3, field4;

This can reduce the noises incurred by plain getter/setter's, especially for
big classes with a lot of fields.

mark.reinhold wrote:
> 
> It's time to start thinking about planning JDK 8.
> 
> We already know what some of the big-ticket items are likely to be.
> There'll be room for other features too, however, both large and small.
> It's therefore time to define a simple process for collecting, sorting,
> reviewing, and prioritizing proposals and plans for new features, for
> JDK 8 and for later releases.
(Continue reading)

roger.calnan | 25 Apr 22:56 2011
Picon

Auto Reply: Project Proposal: Build Infrastructure Changes

I am currently traveling, please contact Stephen Fitch
for anything urgent

Thanks,

Roger

Dalibor Topic | 27 Apr 00:48 2011
Picon

FYI: OpenJDK license file rebranding patch applied to the copy on web

Hi,

I've applied the rebranding patch from [1] to the "GNU General Public
License, version 2, with the Classpath Exception license" file on the 
OpenJDK website located at [2].

cheers,
dalibor topic

[1] "7013964: openjdk LICENSE file needs rebranding" at
    http://bugs.sun.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=7013964
[2] http://openjdk.java.net/legal/gplv2+ce.html
--

-- 
Oracle <http://www.oracle.com>
Dalibor Topic | Java F/OSS Ambassador
Phone: +494023646738 <tel:+494023646738> | Mobile: +491772664192 <tel:+491772664192>
Oracle Java Platform Group

ORACLE Deutschland B.V. & Co. KG | Nagelsweg 55 | 20097 Hamburg

ORACLE Deutschland B.V. & Co. KG
Hauptverwaltung: Riesstr. 25, D-80992 München
Registergericht: Amtsgericht München, HRA 95603

Komplementärin: ORACLE Deutschland Verwaltung B.V.
Hertogswetering 163/167, 3543 AS Utrecht, Niederlande
Handelsregister der Handelskammer Midden-Niederlande, Nr. 30143697
Geschäftsführer: Jürgen Kunz, Marcel van de Molen, Alexander van der Ven

Green Oracle <http://www.oracle.com/commitment> Oracle is committed to developing practices and
(Continue reading)

Andrew Haley | 27 Apr 10:39 2011
Picon

Re: Oracle will disc.. Itanium

On 28/03/11 16:38, Volker Simonis wrote:
> Just for clarification (and in response to your last messages on the
> "OpenJDK for Virtualization"-thread):
> 
> - OpenJDK doesn't currently support Itanium in any way (and it would
> be not trivial to add Itanium support from scratch)
> 
> - IcedTea (http://icedtea.classpath.org/wiki/Main_Page) once build and
> run on Itanium, but there's evidence that that's not the case anymore:
> see http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=345433. Notice that this
> was an Interpreter only version based on Gary Bensons Zero-port of the
> the OpenJDK. As this project was sponsored by RedHad and RedHad
> dropped Itanium support you probably don't have to be a visionary to
> predict its future.

"Red Hat", please.

Zero is portable C++.  All it takes is someone who actually has an
Itanium box to fix the bugs; if no-one who cares has an Itanium box
then it doesn't matter anyway.

Andrew.

Dr Andrew John Hughes | 28 Apr 10:00 2011
Picon

Re: OpenJDK Governing Board Minutes: 20011/4/21

On 27 April 2011 21:45,  <mark.reinhold@...> wrote:
> Attached please find the minutes of Governing Board's meeting
> on 2011/4/21.  They're also available on the web:
>
>    http://openjdk.java.net/groups/gb/minutes/2011-04-21
>
> Respectfully submitted,
> - Mark
>
>

So in short, this unelected self-imposed board has already started to
interfere with OpenJDK by preventing work on OpenJDK 8 from happening
in the open and being subject to public review.  That stinks.
--

-- 
Andrew :-)

Free Java Software Engineer
Red Hat, Inc. (http://www.redhat.com)

Support Free Java!
Contribute to GNU Classpath and the OpenJDK
http://www.gnu.org/software/classpath
http://openjdk.java.net

PGP Key: F5862A37 (https://keys.indymedia.org/)
Fingerprint = EA30 D855 D50F 90CD F54D  0698 0713 C3ED F586 2A37

Fernando Cassia | 28 Apr 10:52 2011
Picon

Re: OpenJDK Governing Board Minutes: 20011/4/21

On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 5:00 AM, Dr Andrew John Hughes
<gnu_andrew@...> wrote:
> So in short, this unelected self-imposed board

Dear Andrew,

Please read this:

http://www.scottberkun.com/blog/2010/how-to-convince-anyone-of-anything/

FC

Mark Wielaard | 28 Apr 11:17 2011

Re: OpenJDK Governing Board Minutes: 20011/4/21

Hi Fernando,

On Thu, 2011-04-28 at 05:52 -0300, Fernando Cassia wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 5:00 AM, Dr Andrew John Hughes
> <gnu_andrew@...> wrote:
> > So in short, this unelected self-imposed board
>
> Please read this:
> 
> http://www.scottberkun.com/blog/2010/how-to-convince-anyone-of-anything/

So, how do you propose this so called "governing board" goes about
convincing people like Andrew to not throw up their hands in disgust at
ignoring the people doing actual community work and trying very hard not
to just have to give up on OpenJDK and fork away? This board is largely
made up of people which are not even actual OpenJDK hackers.

There was a lot of specific feedback [*] aimed at both the selection of
candidates and the actual governance structure, that as far as I can see
has been largely ignored. This board doesn't convince that they should
be "in charge" of governing.

You can expect reactions like Andrew's if all the important questions
asked on both the gb mailing lists and at Fosdem are largely ignored.
How can we get answers to them and be convinced that the answers are the
right ones? I also thought Andrew's message was somewhat undiplomatic,
but he did express precisely what I was thinking myself.

Thanks,

(Continue reading)

Fernando Cassia | 28 Apr 11:56 2011
Picon

Re: OpenJDK Governing Board Minutes: 20011/4/21

On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 6:17 AM, Mark Wielaard <mark@...> wrote:
> So, how do you propose this so called "governing board" goes about
> convincing people like Andrew to not throw up their hands in disgust at
> ignoring the people doing actual community work and trying very hard not
> to just have to give up on OpenJDK and fork away? This board is largely
> made up of people which are not even actual OpenJDK hackers.

I know very little things, Mark. I just have a few opinions, one of
them is that the companies that have put more man hours into a project
(or even, created them!) and pays for most of its developers should
have a bigger say in the direction a given FOSS project, than a few
vocal chronic complainers that apparently would only be happy if such
companies "give up" all control of the project, all in the name of
"community" of course.

The FSF has repeatedly refused to take down RMS´ anti-java rant "the
java trap" article even while it has been renedered obsolete years
ago, the moment Sun Microsystems decided to release Java SE as Free
Software.

So, "it takes two for tango", and sadly -as a former FSF contributor-,
I can´t say I know what the FSF´s true intentions are anymore, and
that rants like Andrew´s which start by attacking the governing board
contribute very little to a climate of collaboration or moving things
forward, unless of course the aim is to create the self-fulfilling
prophecy, that is in this case, a fork.

But hey, that´s me and my probably wrong, baseless and biased
opinions, I´m sure.

(Continue reading)

Dr Andrew John Hughes | 28 Apr 11:57 2011
Picon

Re: OpenJDK Governing Board Minutes: 20011/4/21

On 28 April 2011 10:17, Mark Wielaard <mark@...> wrote:
> Hi Fernando,
>
> On Thu, 2011-04-28 at 05:52 -0300, Fernando Cassia wrote:
>> On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 5:00 AM, Dr Andrew John Hughes
>> <gnu_andrew@...> wrote:
>> > So in short, this unelected self-imposed board
>>
>> Please read this:
>>
>> http://www.scottberkun.com/blog/2010/how-to-convince-anyone-of-anything/
>

You're assuming I'm trying to convince.  As both Simon and Mark point
out, we've already tried that with the governance board and bylaws,
and seen no result.  We also been working on this project for four
years and we still have to put up with stuff like this.  I did spend
time thinking about how to put this (believe it or not), but nothing
but being rather blunt and direct seemed appropriate to express my
disgust at these actions.

I'm tired of being diplomatic and having to chase around after every
little decision.  I'd just like to be able to hack code in a friendly
community and make OpenJDK great.  At present, this project couldn't
be further from that.  If you wonder why there aren't many independent
contributors to OpenJDK, then this is it.  I wouldn't be contributing
to it if I wasn't being paid to do so.
--

-- 
Andrew :-)

(Continue reading)


Gmane