I'm not using KeycloakServletExtension. I got rid of the dependency on
undertow-servlet.
On 7/1/2014 8:58 AM, Tomaž Cerar wrote:
Looking at the code of
https://github.com/keycloak/keycloak/blob/master/integration/undertow/src...
i think there could be better way other than using ServletExtension to
achieve same thing for what you need in domain-http.
It can stay as is for subsystem stuff.
Also lots of classes in that module, have nothing to do with core SSO
need in domain-http (Servlet*)
as there will be no servlet requests coming that way.
In short I think just moving some code around and modifying few
classes we could get rid of many dependancies.
On Tue, Jul 1, 2014 at 2:52 PM, Stan Silvert <ssilvert(a)redhat.com
<mailto:ssilvert@redhat.com>> wrote:
On 7/1/2014 8:49 AM, Stuart Douglas wrote:
>
>
> Stan Silvert wrote:
>> On 6/30/2014 10:43 PM, Stuart Douglas wrote:
>>> It really sounds like this should not be part of core, but
should be
>>> something extra that just integrates with the core.
>> That may be true, but it's not a decision that should depend on
how many
>> modules must be added.
>>
>> The central question is, do we want Keycloak to work out of the
box?
>> Before this issue was known, everyone answered "yes".
>>
>> Should we really determine our feature set based on how many
modules it
>> requires? I don't think we want do that, which is why I'm
having doubts
>> about the current approach.
>
> This has nothing to do with 'working out of the box', e.g.
Servlet and
> EJB will 'work out of the box', as long as you pick a distribution
> that includes them.
I understand. Perhaps I should have said, 'working out of the box on
core'. domain-http is currently in core, which is what I'm talking
about here.
>
>
>
>
>>
>>>
>>> In all honesty we are highly unlikely to ever have accepted a
PR that
>>> added all these dependencies to the core in any case, so it is a
>>> problem that would have had to be solved at some point anyway.
>>>
>>> Stuart
>>>
>>> Stan Silvert wrote:
>>>> I'm starting to have doubts about this split.
>>>>
>>>> Right now I'm trying to integrate the Keycloak (client-side)
adapter
>>>> into build-core so that the web console can use Keycloak for
>>>> authentication. The problem is that there is a huge web of
>>>> dependencies
>>>> that must be moved over from build to build-core.
>>>>
>>>> What exactly is the split trying to solve?
>>>>
>>>> Stan
>>>>
>>>> On 6/27/2014 12:19 PM, Stuart Douglas wrote:
>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>
>>>>> So I am moderately confident that we will be ready to split out
>>>>> Wildfly
>>>>> core into a separate repository early next week (I'm not
saying
>>>>> that it
>>>>> will definitely happen in this time frame, just that it
should be
>>>>> possible).
>>>>>
>>>>> Once this is ready to go I think the basic process will be:
>>>>>
>>>>> - Code freeze on Master
>>>>> - Create the core repo, push new rewritten core history
>>>>> - Release core 1.0.0.Beta1
>>>>> - Create PR against core WF repo that deletes everything in
core, and
>>>>> uses the core 1.0.0.Beta1 release
>>>>> - End of code freeze
>>>>>
>>>>> Stuart
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> wildfly-dev mailing list
>>>>> wildfly-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
<mailto:wildfly-dev@lists.jboss.org>
>>>>>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/wildfly-dev
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> wildfly-dev mailing list
>>>> wildfly-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
<mailto:wildfly-dev@lists.jboss.org>
>>>>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/wildfly-dev
>>
_______________________________________________
wildfly-dev mailing list
wildfly-dev(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:wildfly-dev@lists.jboss.org>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/wildfly-dev