Proposal: ALPN and RSASSA-PSS APIs for Java SE 8 and JDK 8

[Andrew Dinn]

On 09/12/2019 11:05, Andrew Haley wrote:
> On 12/9/19 10:55 AM, Andrew Dinn wrote:
>> That said, I can see Volker's point here. Putting the changes into both
>> 8u40 and 8u252 appears to add an extra redundant step as far as the
>> OpenJDK project is concerned. Is there a reason why the 8u40 backport is
>> needed? (more specifically, why does it need to be adopted as the RI?)
> 
> I think that's because it's a specification change, and all spec changes
> need a reference implementation.
Well, yes, of course. But the question was why 8u40 needs to be the RI?

regards,


Andrew Dinn
-----------
Senior Principal Software Engineer
Red Hat UK Ltd
Registered in England and Wales under Company Registration No. 03798903
Directors: Michael Cunningham, Michael ("Mike") O'Neill