Re: [keycloak-dev] Splitting subsystem into two

From: "Bill Burke" <bburke(a)redhat.com&gt; To: keycloak-dev(a)lists.jboss.org Sent: Tuesday, 6 January, 2015 2:43:12 PM Subject: Re: [keycloak-dev] Splitting subsystem into two If they are separate, why couldn't they be in the same classloader space? They would share dependencies. On 1/6/2015 8:12 AM, Stan Silvert wrote: > You may be right. I think the decision comes down to answering the > question, "Is it ever advantageous to have the server and adapter in the > same classloader space (module)?" The answer will hopefully become > clear once I get a chance to talk to you in more detail about seamless > adapter configuration. > > I've got the client part working where a template configuration is > applied to any unsecured WAR. We just need to decide how the subsystem > will register the application with the server. That's the part where it > might be very helpful to have both in the same module so we can just > make direct calls. Even so, we can't really do that today without > significant refactoring. > > On 1/6/2015 7:48 AM, Stian Thorgersen wrote: >> https://issues.jboss.org/browse/KEYCLOAK-872 made me think it might be >> cleaner to split the subsystem in two, one for the server and another for >> the adapter. >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 > -- Bill Burke JBoss, a division of Red Hat http://bill.burkecentral.com _______________________________________________ keycloak-dev mailing list keycloak-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/keycloak-dev