[keycloak-dev] module re-org
Bill Burke
bburke at redhat.com
Wed Jan 13 14:44:32 EST 2016
I'm working on removing most of our nefarious redirects in the auth flow.
On 1/13/2016 2:38 PM, Stian Thorgersen wrote:
> BTW I'm doing the switch from Jackson to Jackson2 now, so hope you
> haven't started this yet. I'm touching classes everywhere :/
>
> On 13 January 2016 at 20:37, Stian Thorgersen <sthorger at redhat.com
> <mailto:sthorger at redhat.com>> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 13 January 2016 at 20:17, Bill Burke <bburke at redhat.com
> <mailto:bburke at redhat.com>> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 1/13/2016 2:02 PM, Stian Thorgersen wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 13 January 2016 at 20:00, Bill Burke <bburke at redhat.com
>> <mailto:bburke at redhat.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Because it isn't something that would ever be removed
>> like JPA or mongo?
>>
>>
>> Actually, in theory it could. That's why I thought it was a
>> sensible separation. It all relies on Freemarker so if we
>> decided to use something else or to support another
>> templating mechanism as well. Or even to stop using templates
>> and use AngularJS+rest.
>
> No way it is removed for a LOONNGGG time. Too many users are
> dependent on it now. Our own codebase depends on it too.
>
>
> Sure, I'm just saying in theory. My vote goes to keep it separate.
>
>
>>
>> Themes would just be .js and .html and .css right?
>>
>>
>> Yep. I think it's worth keeping them separate.
>>
>>
>>
>> On 1/13/2016 1:19 PM, Stian Thorgersen wrote:
>>> It seems like a logically grouping. Is there a reason
>>> you don't want it separate?
>>>
>>> On 13 January 2016 at 19:17, Bill Burke
>>> <bburke at redhat.com <mailto:bburke at redhat.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Why do you want freemarker separate?
>>>
>>>
>>> On 1/13/2016 1:14 PM, Stian Thorgersen wrote:
>>>> How about:
>>>>
>>>> keycloak-common
>>>> keycloak-common-saml
>>>> keycloak-common-oidc
>>>>
>>>> keycloak-server-spi
>>>> keycloak-server-jpa
>>>> keycloak-server-mongo
>>>> keycloak-server-infinispan
>>>> keycloak-server-freemarker
>>>> keycloak-server-ldap
>>>> keycloak-server-themes
>>>> keycloak-server-wildfly
>>>> keycloak-server-services
>>>>
>>>> All providers that are don't fall into one of the
>>>> above categories (for example timer, protocol
>>>> mappers, etc..) can just go into
>>>> keycloak-server-services.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 12 January 2016 at 19:44, Stian Thorgersen
>>>> <sthorger at redhat.com <mailto:sthorger at redhat.com>>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 12 January 2016 at 19:32, Stian Thorgersen
>>>> <sthorger at redhat.com
>>>> <mailto:sthorger at redhat.com>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 12 January 2016 at 16:26, Bill Burke
>>>> <bburke at redhat.com
>>>> <mailto:bburke at redhat.com>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 1/12/2016 2:45 AM, Stian Thorgersen
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 12 January 2016 at 03:22, Bill
>>>>> Burke <bburke at redhat.com
>>>>> <mailto:bburke at redhat.com>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> I can't find the original email on
>>>>> this, but we need to do this for
>>>>> 1.9. I can start doing it one
>>>>> module at a time:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Common:
>>>>> keycloak-common
>>>>> keycloak-common-saml
>>>>> keycloak-common-oidc
>>>>>
>>>>> Libraries server:
>>>>>
>>>>> keycloak-server-spi - all SPI
>>>>> interfaces and common code
>>>>> keycloak-server-saml - all saml
>>>>> server code, broker and protocol
>>>>> plugins
>>>>> keycloak-server-oidc - all oidc
>>>>> code, broker and protocol plugins
>>>>> keycloak-server-impl - everything
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm not 100% sure we should put all
>>>>> implementations of SPIs into
>>>>> keycloak-server-impl. We at least need
>>>>> to keep Mongo separate as it's not
>>>>> part of the product.
>>>>>
>>>>> If we put all SPI implementations,
>>>>> including services, into the same
>>>>> module we'd end up with one huge
>>>>> module. There's also a risk that we'd
>>>>> end up with strong relationships
>>>>> between them, rather than having them
>>>>> properly linked via SPI interfaces.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm a bit 50/50 on it though.
>>>> You do remember how many modules we
>>>> currently have don't you? Minimally, we
>>>> should have a big SPI module right?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I'm absolutely on board with:
>>>>
>>>> Common:
>>>> keycloak-common
>>>> keycloak-common-saml
>>>> keycloak-common-oidc
>>>>
>>>> Libraries server:
>>>> keycloak-server-spi
>>>>
>>>> So we can agree on that, I'm just not 100%
>>>> sure about a single module for all SPI
>>>> implementations and services.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> We can go with a single module if you want.
>>>> Only thing that needs to be separate is Mongo
>>>> at least for now as it's not going to be
>>>> supported and we need to be able to remove it
>>>> easily.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Bill Burke
>>>> JBoss, a division of Red Hat
>>>> http://bill.burkecentral.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Bill Burke
>>> JBoss, a division of Red Hat
>>> http://bill.burkecentral.com
>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>> Bill Burke
>> JBoss, a division of Red Hat
>> http://bill.burkecentral.com
>>
>>
>
> --
> Bill Burke
> JBoss, a division of Red Hat
> http://bill.burkecentral.com
>
>
>
--
Bill Burke
JBoss, a division of Red Hat
http://bill.burkecentral.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/keycloak-dev/attachments/20160113/722d2323/attachment-0001.html
More information about the keycloak-dev
mailing list