I'm not convinced..
We'd still have to have separate modules for implementations of an SPI, so it would
only reduce the amount of modules somewhat. Besides how often do we create new SPIs?
For users I think having it separate is better as they can more easily see what classes
are relevant to the provider they are implementing.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Burke" <bburke(a)redhat.com>
Sent: Wednesday, 12 August, 2015 2:50:49 PM
Subject: [keycloak-dev] public/private api module structure
I was thinking we'd have a more course-grain module structure for public
apis. We have a crap load of SPIs and having a module for each of them
is a pain for the user and us in creating/maintaining poms as well as
creating maintaing JBoss modules. Something like:
protocol APIs would be for the case where users need to access the raw
SAML document or JWT.
These API modules would only contain public APIs and helper classes. we
can consolidate and/or separate internal implementation classes into any
structure we want with the thought process being that we would organize
these modules so that we have the option to remove features as needed to
make a smaller distro.
JBoss, a division of Red Hat
keycloak-dev mailing list