Re: [keycloak-dev] Keycloak distribution changes

From: "Stian Thorgersen" <stian(a)redhat.com&gt; To: "Boleslaw Dawidowicz" <bdawidow(a)redhat.com&gt; Cc: "Bill Burke" <bburke(a)redhat.com&gt;, keycloak-dev(a)lists.jboss.org Sent: Wednesday, April 15, 2015 2:08:07 PM Subject: Re: [keycloak-dev] Keycloak distribution changes ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Boleslaw Dawidowicz" <bdawidow(a)redhat.com&gt; > To: "Bill Burke" <bburke(a)redhat.com&gt; > Cc: "Stian Thorgersen" <stian(a)redhat.com&gt;, keycloak-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > Sent: Wednesday, April 15, 2015 9:11:36 AM > Subject: Re: [keycloak-dev] Keycloak distribution changes > > > > On 14 Apr 2015, at 15:28, Bill Burke <bburke(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > > > > > > > > On 4/14/2015 9:10 AM, Stian Thorgersen wrote: > >> > >> > >> ----- Original Message ----- > >>> From: "Bill Burke" <bburke(a)redhat.com&gt; > >>> To: keycloak-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > >>> Sent: Tuesday, 14 April, 2015 2:43:52 PM > >>> Subject: Re: [keycloak-dev] Keycloak distribution changes > >>> > >>> * Keycloak Standalone may end up being almost identical to Wildfly > >>> full. > >>> Think about it, we currently need: JPA, JCA (for connection pooling), > >>> JTA (because JCA requires it), Servlet, JAX-RS, and > >>> Infinispan/Clustering. EJB and CDI we might want to include in the > >>> future so that users can write real provider components and take > >>> advantage of all that stuff. SOAP me may have to add when we do STS. > >>> That only leaves out JMS and JSF. > >> > >> You're probably right, but AFAIK it's a requirement for product that we > >> build on WildFly core - Bolek?! > >> > > > > Should be decided on the level of work needed to build off of Wildfly > > core. If it is a pain in the ass, then it might not be worth putting > > the time into it. I'm just not sure how much smaller we could make our > > distro. If we're going from 150M down to 50M it is worth it. If its > > 150M down to 130M its not. WildFly servlets-only is 27M, so there's a way to go until we reach WildFly full which is 125M. Not sure what's in the 100M, but one thing that I think is pretty big is the WF console (due to the GWT crap). Do we need that? > > In general we should go with WF Core. Although I agree - lets try bottom up > first (WF Core + needed stuff) and see what the difference really is to > make > a decision. > > >>> * Installer has to work on EAP 6.x too. > >> > >> Installer for adapter? I can't see why we need installer for server on > >> EAP. > >> > > > > This is for community. There are many users that run Keycloak community > > on EAP.

> > > > > > -- > > 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 > >