Re: [keycloak-dev] module re-org

It seems like a logically grouping. Is there a reason you don't want it separate? On 13 January 2016 at 19:17, Bill Burke <bburke(a)redhat.com <mailto:bburke@redhat.com>> wrote: Why do you want freemarker separate? On 1/13/2016 1:14 PM, Stian Thorgersen wrote: > How about: > > keycloak-common > keycloak-common-saml > keycloak-common-oidc > > keycloak-server-spi > keycloak-server-jpa > keycloak-server-mongo > keycloak-server-infinispan > keycloak-server-freemarker > keycloak-server-ldap > keycloak-server-themes > keycloak-server-wildfly > keycloak-server-services > > All providers that are don't fall into one of the above > categories (for example timer, protocol mappers, etc..) can just > go into keycloak-server-services. > > > On 12 January 2016 at 19:44, Stian Thorgersen > <sthorger(a)redhat.com <mailto:sthorger@redhat.com>> wrote: > > > > On 12 January 2016 at 19:32, Stian Thorgersen > <sthorger(a)redhat.com <mailto:sthorger@redhat.com>> wrote: > > > > On 12 January 2016 at 16:26, Bill Burke > <bburke(a)redhat.com <mailto:bburke@redhat.com>> wrote: > > > > On 1/12/2016 2:45 AM, Stian Thorgersen wrote: >> >> >> On 12 January 2016 at 03:22, Bill Burke >> <bburke(a)redhat.com <mailto:bburke@redhat.com>> wrote: >> >> I can't find the original email on this, but we >> need to do this for >> 1.9. I can start doing it one module at a time: >> >> >> Common: >> keycloak-common >> keycloak-common-saml >> keycloak-common-oidc >> >> Libraries server: >> >> keycloak-server-spi - all SPI interfaces and >> common code >> keycloak-server-saml - all saml server code, >> broker and protocol plugins >> keycloak-server-oidc - all oidc code, broker and >> protocol plugins >> keycloak-server-impl - everything >> >> >> I'm not 100% sure we should put all implementations >> of SPIs into keycloak-server-impl. We at least need >> to keep Mongo separate as it's not part of the product. >> >> If we put all SPI implementations, including >> services, into the same module we'd end up with one >> huge module. There's also a risk that we'd end up >> with strong relationships between them, rather than >> having them properly linked via SPI interfaces. >> >> I'm a bit 50/50 on it though. > You do remember how many modules we currently have > don't you? Minimally, we should have a big SPI module > right? > > > I'm absolutely on board with: > > Common: > keycloak-common > keycloak-common-saml > keycloak-common-oidc > > Libraries server: > keycloak-server-spi > > So we can agree on that, I'm just not 100% sure about a > single module for all SPI implementations and services. > > > We can go with a single module if you want. Only thing that > needs to be separate is Mongo at least for now as it's not > going to be supported and we need to be able to remove it easily. > > > > > -- > Bill Burke > JBoss, a division of Red Hat > http://bill.burkecentral.com > > > > -- Bill Burke JBoss, a division of Red Hat http://bill.burkecentral.com