Re: [keycloak-dev] federation commited need feedback

----- Original Message ----- > From: "Bill Burke" <bburke(a)redhat.com&gt; > To: "Stian Thorgersen" <stian(a)redhat.com&gt; > Cc: keycloak-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > Sent: Thursday, 24 July, 2014 2:47:57 PM > Subject: Re: [keycloak-dev] federation commited need feedback > > > > On 7/24/2014 9:25 AM, Stian Thorgersen wrote: >> Looks good. Only two comments from me: >> >> 1. FederationManager.getFederationProvider uses factories directly >> >> Why is this? This will cause the provider instance not to be registered >> with the session, so won't be closed automatically when the session is >> closed, nor will it be able to attach to the transaction. >> > > FederationProviders are not singletons within KeycloakSession like > RealmProvider, UserProvider, and UserSessionProvider are. You can have > multiple FederationProvider instances per realm. > > > public interface FederationProviderFactory extends > ProviderFactory<FederationProvider> { > FederationProvider getInstance(KeycloakSession session, > FederationProviderModel model); > } > > > FederationProviders implementations have the option to enlist themselves > with the KeycloakSession transaction manager. LDAP (really Picketlink) > doesn't have the concept of a session or transaction, so it doesn't > enlist itself. > > I guess we do need a enlistForClose() method on KeycloakSession though. As long as the lifespan of a FederationProvider is the same as the KeycloakSession they should be created through the KeycloakSession IMO. We just need to add an additional createProvider that can create a instance tied to a specific realm.