Re: SHA1Digest and SHA256Digest

[David Sugar]

Generally we will move things from -HEAD to r1 if it's either a fix for a
nessisary bug, or if it's a feature we would like to see get immediate or
wider use and early testing, but that doesn't modify or effect the
stability or behavior of the library in part or as a whole.  Simply adding 
another digest class certainly doesn't put any existing code at risk, so 
it seemed a good candidate to have in the r1 branch.

On Fri, 22 Nov 2002, Federico Montesino Pouzols wrote:

> On Fri, Nov 22, 2002 at 02:14:57AM -0600, Elizabeth Barham wrote:
> > The latest CVS built great!
> > 
> > I also just uploaded a patch to Savannah that cleans digest.h up a
> > tad. I foolishly left some macros defined in the header file that
> > should have been with the source. Sorry about that.
> > 
> 
>       Good, I have applied the patch and also incorporated the
> SHA*Digest classes to the RELEASE1/stable branch of the CVS. Keep in
> mind that the 1.0.x releases are done from the RELEASE1 branch (you
> have to specify -rRELEASE1 in order to checkout it) of the commoncpp
> CVS.
> 
> > Thank you,
> > 
> > Elizabeth-
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Bug-commoncpp mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-commoncpp
>