<div dir="ltr">Hi,<br><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 10:19 AM, arjan tijms <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:arjan.tijms@gmail.com" target="_blank">arjan.tijms@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div>I wonder if it would make sense to put the generic jaspic security domain by default in standalone.xml. It's always the same anyway. With the domain present in a stock WildFly it's much easier for people to start with JASPIC on WildFly.<br></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Anyone has any thoughts on this?</div><div><br></div><div>WildFly currently has one of the best JASPIC implementations out there, but this relatively tiny problem is a big hurdle for usability, and especially impedes using WildFly for JSR 375 demonstrations.</div><div><br></div><div>Hope something can be done here.</div><div><br></div><div>Kind regards,</div><div>Arjan Tijms</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div></div><div><br></div><div>It concerns this fragment:</div><div><br></div><div><div> <security-domain name="jaspitest" cache-type="default"></div><div> <authentication-jaspi></div><div> <login-module-stack name="dummy"></div><div> <login-module code="Dummy" flag="optional"/></div><div> </login-module-stack></div><div> <auth-module code="Dummy"/></div><div> </authentication-jaspi></div><div> </security-domain></div></div><div><br></div><div>Kind regards,</div><div>Arjan Tijms</div></div>
</blockquote></div><br></div></div>