On 19/10/12 01:34, Anil Saldhana wrote:
a) I am presuming we have agreement that the PicketLink version for
the
consolidated workspace should be v3.x
+1, I've gone ahead and updated the version number. On a site note,
some of the LDAPIdentityStore tests have started failing and I'm not
sure why. Anil, if you have time could you please take a look at this?
Otherwise I can delve deeper into it later today.
b) Regarding the module name "core" that most of us want
renamed to "cdi".
I do not see issues with it called "core" as long as PL 2.x federation
users on non-ee environments upgrading to PL3 do not have a requirement
to have CDI/Weld jars. Ideally we cannot force users to require Weld
jars to run SAML on tomcat, for example.
I'm -1 on renaming core to cdi. To me this seems like a ridiculous
idea, akin to Spring Security calling their core module "spring", or
Hibernate calling their core module "db". If we're going to be pushing
PicketLink as being a complete security integration framework for EE6
then it would be redundant and non-intuitive to name the core module
cdi. As for PicketLink Federation, if there is an SE requirement for it
then we can just implement it as a submodule like we've done for IDM,
and make a note in the documentation that it is possible to use it
standalone in an SE environment.
_______________________________________________
security-dev mailing list
security-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/security-dev