On 18 March 2010 21:12, Christopher Hegarty -Sun Microsystems Ireland
wrote:
> Andrew John Hughes wrote:
>>
>> On 18 March 2010 20:56, Christopher Hegarty -Sun Microsystems Ireland
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Brad, Pavel, Andrew,
>>>
>>> I'm also not comfortable with this test, but what bothers me more tha
Andrew John Hughes wrote:
On 18 March 2010 20:56, Christopher Hegarty -Sun Microsystems Ireland
wrote:
Brad, Pavel, Andrew,
I'm also not comfortable with this test, but what bothers me more than the
reliance on an external server is the reliance on cacerts. While cacerts (or
equivalent) is not
On 18 March 2010 20:56, Christopher Hegarty -Sun Microsystems Ireland
wrote:
> Brad, Pavel, Andrew,
>
> I'm also not comfortable with this test, but what bothers me more than the
> reliance on an external server is the reliance on cacerts. While cacerts (or
> equivalent) is not part of OpenJDK I d
Brad, Pavel, Andrew,
I'm also not comfortable with this test, but what bothers me more than
the reliance on an external server is the reliance on cacerts. While
cacerts (or equivalent) is not part of OpenJDK I don't think it makes
sense adding a test to OpenJDK that has a reliance on it.
For
On 18 March 2010 18:40, Brad Wetmore wrote:
>
> I have a couple important tasks to finish ASAP, so if there is more
> discussion, I'll have to jump in sometime next week, but wanted to add
> one thing before anything was done:
>
> Pavel wrote:
>> And we can use other URL if verisign.com is problem
I have a couple important tasks to finish ASAP, so if there is more
discussion, I'll have to jump in sometime next week, but wanted to add
one thing before anything was done:
Pavel wrote:
> And we can use other URL if verisign.com is problematic.
We've tried to limit the reliance on servers outs
