On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 11:55 AM, Bruno Oliveira <bruno(a)abstractj.org>wrote:
Correct, our friend AeroGearUser became a zombie and no more belongs
to
our ecosystem.
which is good :)
If someone is concerned about: username, loginName, whaTeVerName. It
must be coordinated between server and client.
+1
Possible solutions:
- Accept 'username' as pretty name on the endpoint and make use of DTOs
(I don't like)
- Accept flexible names on client APIs +1
yeah. see AGIOS-35 for example (similar to what JS does)
- Extend SimpleUser from PL (I don't like it)
Bear in mind that every security framework will have their own
implementation and AeroGear security doesn't have control over it.
correct, that's why I prefer a flexible client API, like JS already has.
Matthias Wessendorf wrote:
> The PushServer is based on AeroGear security 1.0.1, and AeroGearUser is
> gone in there.
> With the 1.0.1 + PL The "underlying" PL User uses "loginName".
> With AeroGear-Sec 1.0.0 we had the AeroGear User, which used "username".
>
> That's the entire explanation :)
>
>
> Coming back to the point of "configuration", that's needed on Android
> and iOS (like the JS bits) for the matter of the "user" in AeroGear-Shiro
> is using "username" as well, while the PL "User" has
"loginName".
--
abstractj
_______________________________________________
aerogear-dev mailing list
aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
--
Matthias Wessendorf
blog:
http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
sessions:
http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
twitter:
http://twitter.com/mwessendorf