sbryzak at redhat.com
Tue Jun 11 19:48:15 EDT 2013
Anil already responded to this in his very first reply:
On 12/06/13 06:39, Anil Saldhana wrote:
> But for Wildfly core authentication using PicketLink
> IDM, for database backends, JDBC makes sense.
I agree with him (and Jason), it absolutely does make sense to use JDBC
for the PicketLink subsystem in Wildfly.
On 12/06/13 09:32, Bill Burke wrote:
> It wasn't a tangent discussion, Jason asked, "do we have to depend on
> JPA?" You guys inferred that to do this application model sharing
> you're talking about, JPA is required...
> On 6/11/2013 7:24 PM, Shane Bryzak wrote:
>> On 12/06/13 09:15, Bill Burke wrote:
>>> I thought what we were discussing here is removing the dependency on JPA
>>> for the RDBMS backend plugin when deploying picketlink to Wildfly?
>> That's how the thread started, but then it veered into a discussion
>> about what application developers care about.
>> On 06/11/2013 03:53 PM, Bill Burke wrote:
>>> JPA vs. JDBC isn't a choice, users won't care. Why would app developers
>>> care either? They should be using management interfaces or the upcoming
>>> sso server to manage their domains.
>> From your perspective, this might be sufficient to meet your own
>> requirements however Anil and the security team have to look at the
>> bigger picture. Not every developer is going to use PicketLink in the
>> exact same way.
>> security-dev mailing list
>> security-dev at lists.jboss.org
More information about the security-dev