Re: [wildfly-dev] Preparation for requirements and capabilities.

On 03/25/2015 09:35 AM, Brian Stansberry wrote: > On 3/25/15 9:15 AM, David M. Lloyd wrote: >> >> The thing is that some things will require specific types and some will >> allow the general type. So the simple solution is, each realm shall >> register two capabilities, one being the generic security-realm=myname >> and the other being type-specific, ldap-realm=myname. This way things >> which allow the generic type can use it, whereas things which require >> ldap can require that. Additional "levels" can be added in the event >> that there is a hierarchy of types. This allows the simpler mechanism >> to accommodate complex use cases. >> > > This can certainly work; there's nothing preventing code registering > multiple capabilities. The validation issue I mentioned above still > applies, but I figure we can sort that. > > Circling back to the ServiceName discussion, would this be implemented > via an alias ServiceName? So there would be a Service<LdapRealm> > registered under org.wildfly.extension.security.ldap-realm.foo but then > also registered with an alias of > org.wildfly.extension.security.security-realm.foo? The consumer of the > latter not concerned about/aware of the fact it provides > Service<LdapRealm> because LdapRealm is a subtype of SecurityRealm? > > A provider could do this other ways as well (just create two services) > but the above seems feasible. Is it necessary to have separate MSC namespaces for each capability namespace? Since all security realms would have to ultimately be a security-realm, it seems like one MSC namespace could suffice.