On 5/13/2015 10:06 AM, Stan Silvert wrote:
Can we go ahead and make a final decision on this? My code needs a
home. :-)
On 5/12/2015 2:03 PM, Stan Silvert wrote:
> On 5/12/2015 1:33 PM, Bill Burke wrote:
>> What's the reasoning for a separate repo?
> I thought we just discussed this in the meeting, but given the poor
> audio/video from my internet connection, I'm not surprised you would
> ask. :-) (I think I have it fixed now, btw)
>
> It started with the discussion below. This stuff could go in either
> WildFly or Keycloak. But WildFly is getting away from having these
> things in one uber repo. Even Elytron itself is in its own repo.
>
> We could put it in Keycloak's repo, but I don't see any advantage. This
> stuff requires WildFly 10 and Java 8. I'm not sure if we're ready to
> deal with that in the Keycloak repo yet.
>
Why keep it in the same repo?
* Its easier for development. You import one pom.xml and then everything
is loaded. You make a refactor in a core class, and you see the effects
everywhere.
* We know pull requests don't undermine any keycloak modules. With
separate repos, a PR to keycloak/keycloak could pass the CI build and be
merged, but break keycloak/elytron.
> But I think the main question is, do we want Keycloak/Elytron
> integration to be tied to Keycloak releases? If a WildFly release needs
> something from keycloak-eleytron integration then it's much easier to
> just do a release of the small repo than to do a full release of the
> entire Keycloak product.
>
THere is nothing stopping us from doing an adapter only release if there
is only one repo. You can branch from a tag, do the changes, do the
adapter-only release, merge branch into main.
Wildfly is composed of projects from a variety of teams. Keycloak is a
one project one team.
--
Bill Burke
JBoss, a division of Red Hat
http://bill.burkecentral.com