[keycloak-dev] Keycloak distribution changes

[Stian Thorgersen]

----- Original Message -----
> From: "Boleslaw Dawidowicz" <bdawidow at redhat.com>
> To: "Bill Burke" <bburke at redhat.com>
> Cc: "Stian Thorgersen" <stian at redhat.com>, keycloak-dev at lists.jboss.org
> Sent: Wednesday, April 15, 2015 9:11:36 AM
> Subject: Re: [keycloak-dev] Keycloak distribution changes
> 
> 
> > On 14 Apr 2015, at 15:28, Bill Burke <bburke at redhat.com> wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > On 4/14/2015 9:10 AM, Stian Thorgersen wrote:
> >> 
> >> 
> >> ----- Original Message -----
> >>> From: "Bill Burke" <bburke at redhat.com>
> >>> To: keycloak-dev at lists.jboss.org
> >>> Sent: Tuesday, 14 April, 2015 2:43:52 PM
> >>> Subject: Re: [keycloak-dev] Keycloak distribution changes
> >>> 
> >>> * Keycloak Standalone may end up being almost identical to Wildfly full.
> >>>   Think about it, we currently need: JPA, JCA (for connection pooling),
> >>> JTA (because JCA requires it), Servlet, JAX-RS, and
> >>> Infinispan/Clustering.  EJB and CDI we might want to include in the
> >>> future so that users can write real provider components and take
> >>> advantage of all that stuff.  SOAP me may have to add when we do STS.
> >>> That only leaves out JMS and JSF.
> >> 
> >> You're probably right, but AFAIK it's a requirement for product that we
> >> build on WildFly core - Bolek?!
> >> 
> > 
> > Should be decided on the level of work needed to build off of Wildfly
> > core.  If it is a pain in the ass, then it might not be worth putting
> > the time into it.  I'm just not sure how much smaller we could make our
> > distro.  If we're going from 150M down to 50M it is worth it.  If its
> > 150M down to 130M its not.

WildFly servlets-only is 27M, so there's a way to go until we reach WildFly full which is 125M.

Not sure what's in the 100M, but one thing that I think is pretty big is the WF console (due to the GWT crap). Do we need that?

> 
> In general we should go with WF Core. Although I agree - lets try bottom up
> first (WF Core + needed stuff) and see what the difference really is to make
> a decision.
> 
> >>> * Installer has to work on EAP 6.x too.
> >> 
> >> Installer for adapter? I can't see why we need installer for server on
> >> EAP.
> >> 
> > 
> > This is for community.  There are many users that run Keycloak community
> > on EAP.
> > 
> > 
> > --
> > Bill Burke
> > JBoss, a division of Red Hat
> > http://bill.burkecentral.com
> > _______________________________________________
> > keycloak-dev mailing list
> > keycloak-dev at lists.jboss.org
> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/keycloak-dev
> 
>