[keycloak-dev] public/private api module structure

[Stian Thorgersen]

I'm not convinced..

We'd still have to have separate modules for implementations of an SPI, so it would only reduce the amount of modules somewhat. Besides how often do we create new SPIs?

For users I think having it separate is better as they can more easily see what classes are relevant to the provider they are implementing.

----- Original Message -----
> From: "Bill Burke" <bburke at redhat.com>
> To: keycloak-dev at lists.jboss.org
> Sent: Wednesday, 12 August, 2015 2:50:49 PM
> Subject: [keycloak-dev] public/private api module structure
> 
> I was thinking we'd have a more course-grain module structure for public
> apis.  We have a crap load of SPIs and having a module for each of them
> is a pain for the user and us in creating/maintaining poms as well as
> creating maintaing JBoss modules.  Something like:
> 
> keycloak-core-api
> keycloak-server-api
> keycloak-client-api
> 
> and
> 
> keycloak-saml-api
> keycloak-oidc-api
> 
> protocol APIs would be for the case where users need to access the raw
> SAML document or JWT.
> 
> These API modules would only contain public APIs and helper classes.  we
> can consolidate and/or separate internal implementation classes into any
> structure we want with the thought process being that we would organize
> these modules so that we have the option to remove features as needed to
> make a smaller distro.
> 
> --
> 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
>