Unless someone has very strong arguments against it we're going to rename
the script to "add-user-keycloak". Main reason is that WildFly
documentation refer to the "add-user" script throughout their
documentation, so the simplest is to have our own rather than override what
they have. We'll also remove the '--container' argument. If anyone was
wondering 'add-user-keycloak' is confirmed as ok for product.
On 25 April 2016 at 14:30, Marek Posolda <mposolda(a)redhat.com> wrote:
+1
On 25/04/16 13:59, Stan Silvert wrote:
+1. That's the "prettier" UI option I was talking about.
On 4/25/2016 4:56 AM, Stian Thorgersen wrote:
+1 To what Marek is proposing
I'd suggest a slightly more mellow tone though. Rather than the current
message (which is a bit rubbish):
Added 'k' to
'/home/st/tmp/keycloak-1.9.2.Final/standalone/configuration/keycloak-add-user.json',
restart server to load user
We could do:
Keycloak admin user added, please restart server to make the user
available. To add user for jboss-cli please run "add-user" with
"--container" option.
Other improvements we could do are:
* "--container" description should be "Add user to jboss-cli. For usage
use '--container --help'"
* When add-user is run without options it currently says 'Option: -u.. is
required' it should instead display help text (--help) and the help text
should have a paragraph on the bottom stating how the user is added, that
the server needs to be reloaded and also how to add a user to jboss-cli.
I'm happy to incorporate the above changes if that's what we agree on.
On 25 April 2016 at 10:45, Marek Posolda <mposolda(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> On 25/04/16 09:35, Stian Thorgersen wrote:
>
> Seems like the majority (that being everyone besides me) would like to
> have the script renamed. So let's go for it, but first I have two questions:
>
> Btv. I didn't suggest to rename, but keep as is. But always when people
> run "add-user.sh" without "--container", there will be be a big
warning
> similar to:
>
> "You are adding Keycloak admin, but not Wildfly admin!!! If you want to
> add Wildfly admin use the option --container"
>
> This should solve both your (a) and (b) and remove most of confusions
> IMO. And in the future version, when keycloak and wildfly admin will be
> same thing, we can still use same "add-user.sh" script without need to
> rename, remove or add any new script. We will just remove the warning and
> possibly support for "--container" option.
>
>
> Marek
>
>
>
> a) What should it be called (it can't be add-user-keycloak.sh as then it
> wouldn't make sense in product)? add-user-sso.sh is an idea, but is it
> clear that's adding "Keycloak admin console" users
> b) Will we not get a bunch of people asking "I added a user with
> add-user, but still can't login to Keycloak admin console"? Do we have a
> solution for that?
>
> On 25 April 2016 at 03:41, Stan Silvert < <ssilvert(a)redhat.com>
> ssilvert(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> On 4/24/2016 2:58 PM, Bill Burke wrote:
>> > Completely different. standalone.sh and domain.sh are completely new
>> > run.sh variants and run.sh disappeared.
>> Nope. If there was no domain.sh we would have kept run.sh.
>> standalone.sh does exactly the same thing run.sh used to do.
>> Furthermore, run.sh didn't disappear. It just prints a helpful message.
>>
>> The situation here is exactly the same. If there was no "keycloak"
>> add-user we would have kept the old one.
>>
>> Bill, I agree that the current situation is confusing. Stian, I agree
>> that having both "add-user.sh" and "add-user-keycloak.sh" is
also
>> confusing.
>>
>> The WildFly solution isn't pretty, but at least it isn't confusing.
>>
>> I suppose you could make the whole thing prettier by slapping some extra
>> UI into the unified version. Let it prompt the user for what he really
>> wants to do, etc., etc.
>> >
>> > add-user.sh is the same script as the old. and you've already had two
>> > Red Hat people scratching their heads wondering what happened to
>> > add-user.sh.
>> Were you including me? I complained about this several weeks ago, so
>> perhaps you can make that three Red Hat people. I agree that it's a
>> problem.
>> >
>> > On 4/23/2016 3:04 PM, Stan Silvert wrote:
>> >> We had the same kind of problem in WildFly a few years ago. Everyone
>> >> was used to starting the server with run.sh. But we needed to change
>> >> that to differentiate between standalone.sh and domain.sh. So we made
>> >> run.bat just print out a "This is deprecated. Here is what you
need
>> to
>> >> do...." message.
>> >>
>> >> It's not a perfect solution, but we could do the same thing with
>> >> add-user.sh and tell them to use either add-user-keycloak.sh or
>> >> add-user-eap.sh. At least you wouldn't get any support questions.
>> >>
>> >> On 4/23/2016 9:06 AM, Ilya Rum wrote:
>> >>> Hello!
>> >>>
>> >>> As a new member of keycloak QA team I recently had to set up some
>> >>> clustering with domain mode.
>> >>> I was really confused when add-user.sh did not add user to jboss
but
>> >>> rather created the keycloak-add-user.json.
>> >>> The worst thing was that I couldn't find any docs on adding user
to
>> >>> underlying eap at all.
>> >>> Had to read the add-user.sh itself to find out what was happening.
>> >>> Even if it remains as it is, it really should be at least mentioned
>> in
>> >>> the docs :)
>> >>>
>> >>> Have a nice day!
>> >>> Ilya Rum.
>> >>>
>> >>> On Sat, Apr 23, 2016 at 08:48:15AM -0400, Bill Burke wrote:
>> >>>> Do you care about usability at all? Not everything can fit
into
>> nice little
>> >>>> boxes all the time. This is going to be extremely confusing
for
>> users. I
>> >>>> ran into it myself as I thought the jboss add-user.sh script
was
>> overwritten
>> >>>> by our distribution script by mistake. *OF COURSE* we should
have a
>> >>>> separate add-user.sh script. Even when, hopefully, JBoss can
>> delegate to
>> >>>> Keycloak in maybe 7.1. If we are going to leverage the JBoss
>> platform, and
>> >>>> this means the JBoss documentation too, every management
function
>> that
>> >>>> exists in JBoss should be available in Keycloak and *WORK THE
SAME
>> WAY*. If
>> >>>> we don't change this, we're going to get a ton of
support questions
>> that
>> >>>> say: "Why doesn't add-user.sh work?"
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> On 4/23/2016 1:29 AM, Stian Thorgersen wrote:
>> >>>>> In the future we need to secure the underlying WildFly with
rhsso.
>> In
>> >>>>> which case our add-user will add users for both Keycloak
and
>> WildFly/EAP.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> IMO there's going to be confusion until the above is
solved no
>> matter what
>> >>>>> we do. We'll need to document this whichever way we do
it. Options
>> are
>> >>>>> stay with what we have or rename our script. My vote goes to
keep
>> as is
>> >>>>> and document it. Then hopefully by 7.1 we can secure the
WildFly
>> bits so
>> >>>>> the problem goes away. With the other option (rename ours)
there
>> will be a
>> >>>>> problem once WildFly bits are secured by Keycloak as now the
wf
>> add-user
>> >>>>> script should no longer be used and completely removed at
which
>> point we
>> >>>>> should then rename it back. So in the long run sticking with
how
>> it is
>> >>>>> today is ideal. It's also way to late making changes
now. BTW this
>> has
>> >>>>> been around for months.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> On 22 Apr 2016 22:14, "Bill Burke" <
<bburke(a)redhat.com>
>> bburke(a)redhat.com
>> >>>>> <mailto:
<bburke@redhat.com>bburke(a)redhat.com>> wrote:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> On 4/22/2016 3:57 PM, Marek Posolda wrote:
>> >>>>> > That's the question...
>> >>>>> >
>> >>>>> > For server distribution, we also have our stuff (
keycloak
>> >>>>> subsystem,
>> >>>>> > datasource, infinispan etc) directly declared in
>> >>>>> "standalone.xml". On
>> >>>>> > the other hand, for overlay distribution, we
don't want to
>> directly
>> >>>>> > update default "standalone.xml", so we
are adding our own
>> >>>>> > "standalone-keycloak.xml". Isn't it
quite similar thing?
>> >>>>> >
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Product will not have the overlay distribution.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> > We can do the same for overlay and server
distribution, so
>> never
>> >>>>> edit
>> >>>>> > default wildfly files ( standalone.xml ,
add-user.sh), but
>> >>>>> always use
>> >>>>> > our own versions with "-keycloak"
suffix. Advantage is more
>> >>>>> > consistent. However people will need to always
start
>> keycloak server
>> >>>>> > with "./standalone.sh -c
standalone-keycloak.xml" then.
>> Doesn't it
>> >>>>> > sucks from the usability perspective?
>> >>>>> >
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> The overlay exists because we can't distribute EAP
within
>> community.
>> >>>>> Keycloak should be run as a separate server, so, IMO,
>> -keycloak.xml
>> >>>>> files should go away and overwrite standalone.xml,
>> >>>>> standalone-ha.xml and
>> >>>>> domain.xml
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> > I honestly don't know what's the best way
regarding
>> usability. AFAIK
>> >>>>> > this was decided on mailing lists couple of
months ago,
>> but don't
>> >>>>> > remember the exact threads...:/
>> >>>>> >
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> I'm pretty adamant about this. There will be a
huge amount
>> of
>> >>>>> confusion
>> >>>>> if we don't make this separation. Wildfly/JBoss
and
>> Keycloak are hard
>> >>>>> enough to configure as it is.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> --
>> >>>>> Bill Burke
>> >>>>> JBoss, a division of Red Hat
>> >>>>>
<
http://bill.burkecentral.com>http://bill.burkecentral.com
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> _______________________________________________
>> >>>>> keycloak-dev mailing list
>> >>>>>
<keycloak-dev@lists.jboss.org>keycloak-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>> <mailto:keycloak-dev@lists.jboss.org>
>> >>>>>
<
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/keycloak-dev>
>>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/keycloak-dev
>> >>>>>
>> >>>> --
>> >>>> Bill Burke
>> >>>> JBoss, a division of Red Hat
>> >>>>
<
http://bill.burkecentral.com>http://bill.burkecentral.com
>> >>>>
>> >>>> _______________________________________________
>> >>>> keycloak-dev mailing list
>> >>>>
<keycloak-dev@lists.jboss.org>keycloak-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>> >>>> <
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/keycloak-dev>
>>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/keycloak-dev
>> >>> _______________________________________________
>> >>> keycloak-dev mailing list
>> >>> keycloak-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>> >>>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/keycloak-dev
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> keycloak-dev mailing list
>> >> keycloak-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>> >>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/keycloak-dev
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> keycloak-dev mailing list
>> keycloak-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/keycloak-dev
>>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> keycloak-dev mailing
listkeycloak-dev@lists.jboss.orghttps://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/keycloak-dev
>
>
>