Re: [wildfly-dev] Pending core split

Stan Silvert wrote: > On 7/1/2014 9:01 AM, Stuart Douglas wrote: >> >>> 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. >> >> I don't follow your logic here. You are basically saying that unless >> we can have keycloak in core then there is no point having a core? > Of course that's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that domain-http is > currently in core. Web console and other clients use domain-http. If we > want keycloak to authenticate domain-http then keycloak must also be in > core. > I don't follow your logic. If we want web console and other clients to use keycloak then keycloak must be present, but I really can't see why you think it *must* be in core. IMHO the way this should work is that we identify the extension points you need to integrate keycloak,

looking at your kcauth branch this looks fairly simple, basically just a way to add some handlers and Authentication mechanisms. You then have the keycloak module use these extension points to integrate with core. IMHO this will give a much cleaner result and keeps all the keycloak related stuff in the keycloak module. > There are many possible solutions: > * Don't do the split The split has been on the table for over 6 months, it is going ahead. > * Do the split, but allow core to see the full set of modules. This makes no sense. If it has all the modules it is not core. > * Move domain-http out of core. > * Allow the extra dependencies. > * Redesign domain-http If by redesign you mean add some extension points to allow keycloak to hook into it without requiring keycloak code in domain-http then this is exactly what we should do. If you want a hand with this I should be able to help you out.

Stuart > * others? > >> >> Core can't actually do anything out of the box, it is a runtime that >> other distributions will build on. >> >> Stuart >> >> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> 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 >>>>>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/wildfly-dev >>>>>>> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> wildfly-dev mailing list >>>>>>> wildfly-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >>>>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/wildfly-dev >>>>> >>> > _______________________________________________ wildfly-dev mailing list wildfly-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/wildfly-dev