[jboss-dev-forums] [Design of JBoss Identity] - Re: comments on IDM 1.0-alpha1.

[bdaw]

"jeff.yuchang" wrote : 
  | 1. Currently, the idm module has two implementation out of box, one is db, the other is ldap. I am wondering will it be better if we split it to two modules, say idm-hibernate, idm-ldap etc. so that people can just use what they want. 
  | 

The ldap implementation doesn't add any additional dependencies itself - it is plain JNDI. So now there would be quite minimal advantage when using plain LDAP scenario (no hibernate dependencies...). Still I think it is a good idea to split the modules for the future. Will benefit if we have more implementations. 

anonymous wrote : 
  | 2. In the db scenario, I have found that we need to have the persistence.xml in the META-INF/ folder, and in the persistence.xml, we have listed a set of implementation classes. I am thinking that can we hidden those implementation classes to users somehow. such as we can have a default persistence.xml(or other name) that contains the inner implementation class in the idm-hibernate module. while for the users, they just need to configure the database connection.
  | 
Good point, also the database connection properties need to be placed outside then. Yesterday I converted hibernateIdentityStoreImpl to use Hibernate SessionFactory instead of JPA stuff and I may switch to hibernate configuration files. 

Could you make jiras for those ideas and assign them to me? 

View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4206899#4206899

Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4206899