I have finally uploaded a version of the package that I consider acceptable.
http://matrix.cpantesters.org/?dist=Crypt-TimestampedData
But I don't know why the tests in the last two releases (0.01_04 &
0.01_05) are limited to the ‘Linux’ platform(all passed).
Perhaps it's because there were too many errors in in the previous
testson all tested platforms?
I'm sure I've removed the issues that caused those errors, but now I
don't have any feedback to be sure.
I apologise for the mistakes ... of youth... I hope to improve.
Should I request that the tests be reactivated? If so, how?
regards
Guido Brugnara
Il 29/09/25 14:04, Guido Brugnara ha scritto:
I would like to thank those who suggested I use an alias for the
module name.
I have therefore published
https://metacpan.org/release/BRUGNARA/Crypt-TimestampedData-0.01-TRIAL
Any comments you may have will be taken into consideration before
final publication.
Thank you!
Guido Brugnara
Il 14/09/25 13:15, Guido Brugnara ha scritto:
Hello module-authors,
I’d like feedback on a new CPAN distribution I’m preparing:
Crypt::TSD. It implements reading and writing of RFC 5544 “Syntax for
Binding Documents with Time-Stamps” containers (file extension .tsd;
media type “application/timestamped-data” per RFC 5955).
In practice, .tsd is used notably in Italy; globally, adoption
appears limited compared to RFC 3161 Time-Stamp Tokens and ETSI/eIDAS
containers (CAdES/XAdES/PAdES/ASiC).
Still, .tsd exists in the wild and there is no dedicated CPAN module
covering it. Based on my survey of open-source options, the only Open
Source library exposing APIs for RFC 5544/.tsd that I found is Bouncy
Castle (Java); Crypt::TSD would provide a Perl alternative.
Planned scope:
- Read .tsd files and extract the original content and associated
time-stamp tokens.
- Create .tsd files from content and existing RFC 3161 tokens.
- Provide helpers for basic structural checks; further verification
utilities may follow.
- Provide command line scripts to read/write .tsd files.
Before first upload, I’d appreciate feedback on:
- The namespace: does Crypt::TSD look appropriate (alternatives:
Crypt::TimestampedData, Crypt::RFC5544)?
- Any API/naming concerns or prior art I should align with.
Thanks in advance for your guidance. I’m happy to adjust naming and
API based on suggestions.
Best regards,
Guido Brugnara
