On 5 April 2016 at 12:58, Marek Posolda <mposolda(a)redhat.com> wrote:
On 05/04/16 10:19, Stian Thorgersen wrote:
At least personally I think the admin client needs some TLC. For example
creating a user requires:
UserRepresentation user = new UserRepresentation();
user.setUsername("user");
Response response = keycloak.realm("realm").users().create(user);
// Retrieve created user id
String path = response.getLocation().getPath();
String id = path.substring(path.lastIndexOf('/') + 1);
// Remember to close the response
response.close();
// Set password
CredentialRepresentation credentials = new
CredentialRepresentation();
credentials.setType(CredentialRepresentation.PASSWORD);
credentials.setValue("password");
keycloak.realm("realm").users().get(id).resetPassword(credentials);
// Add role
RoleRepresentation role =
keycloak.realm("realm").roles().get("role").toRepresentation();
keycloak.realm("realm").users().get(id).roles().realmLevel().add(Collections.singletonList(role));
That's pretty rubbish right?
In my opinion a lot of the usability issues is caused by directly exposing
interfaces/proxies from RestEasy Client and it would be much better if we
introduced a wrapper around it.
Yeah, agree that usability is not very great.
However to me personally, the biggest issue is not usability but the fact,
that admin-client needs to be manually maintained. AFAIK it was lots of
spent time - especially for Stan and Marko - to have the admin-client
synced with the latest server. And it seems that earlier or later, the
issue will be back once we will add more endpoints. We can have "policy"
that everyone, who is adding new server endpoint, would need to update
client too (which is usually needed anyway for the test). But that still
requires some time spend in manually updating code + there is some risk
that earlier or later will admin-client still become outdated...
IMO If we can have admin-client autogenerated, it will be a huge win. I am
not sure if it's realistic (and seems that it will be even harder to
accomplish if we use wrapper instead of JAX-RS directly. ) but maybe worth
to look into it at least?
I don't think auto-generating is realistic. Nor do I think it will be a
particularly big issue going forward. If anyone touches the admin endpoints
they WILL update the admin client as well as add tests for it, end of ;)
So my questions are:
1) What do we do with regards to admin client? Do we just wrap what we
have, keep it or create a brand new one from scratch?
2) Is it an issue that we require a specific RestEasy version to use the
admin client? This seems a heavy dependency to me, which could conflict
with other JAX-RS libraries. Using JAX-RS 2 Client would be an improvement
as it should in theory work with any JAX-RS 2 provider.
3) What do we do with current fixes for admin client? Do we merge to
master and 1.9.x or just merge to master?
At least from my POV the answers are:
1) Create wrappers around interfaces/proxies from RestEasy client and not
expose JAX-RS directly through the API as that should be an implementation
detail
+1 for wrappers. And as I mentioned above, look if we can do something
regarding autogeneration (or at least something else to enforce the
admin-client won't become outdated again).
API's, user interfaces, etc.. can NOT be auto-generated if you want to have
anything remotely usable
2) Use JAX-RS 2 client
+1
But it will be good if people have possibility to configure the details of
underlying Apache HTTP Client (connection pooling, connection/socket
timeouts, tls etc). If it's possible to achieve it and use JAX-RS 2 client
at the same time, it will be cool. Otherwise if we need to choose just one
of these, the "configurability" of Apache HTTP client is more important IMO.
Sticking with RestEasy Client makes the assumption that all users use other
JBoss projects. We know that's not true as Tomcat, Jetty and Spring
adapters all have a lot of use. IMO we should either convert to JAX-RS 2
client or use Apache HTTP client directly (I'm not to keen on that though).
3) Merge fixes to both master and 1.9.x (admin client is not
supported in
product for now, so it's less risky)
+1
Marek
_______________________________________________
keycloak-dev mailing
listkeycloak-dev@lists.jboss.orghttps://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/keycloak-dev