[security-dev] [PicketLink] - Module Organization

[Anil Saldhana]

Darran - very good point.  Since our modules will be at a jar level, it 
should be possible to just use
the modules that AS security is interested in.

On 04/04/2013 08:33 AM, Darran Lofthouse wrote:
> Also we have a requirement for a minimal dependency on picketlink idm so
> we do not want to be bringing in anything additional where that is all
> we require.
>
> Regards,
> Darran Lofthouse.
>
>
> On 03/04/13 18:19, Anil Saldhana wrote:
>> That should be the goal. One jar -> one module.
>>
>> On Apr 3, 2013, at 11:56 AM, "David M. Lloyd" <david.lloyd at redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Always, always, always have one module per JAR.  If this doesn't make
>>> sense for a project (e.g. split package problems) then this indicates
>>> that the project's JAR boundaries were not properly considered.
>>>
>>> On 04/03/2013 11:17 AM, Pedro Igor Silva wrote:
>>>> Hi All,
>>>>
>>>>      I was thinking about the best way to organize the PicketLink libraries with the AS module structure.
>>>>
>>>>      Now that PicketLink have some sub-projects, I was wondering if we should have a single module for all libraries (core, idm, federation, oauth, etc):
>>>>
>>>>              org/picketlink/main
>>>>                    - core.jar
>>>>                    - idm.jar
>>>>                    - federation.jar
>>>>                    - etc.
>>>>
>>>>      Or if is better to have different modules for each project:
>>>>
>>>>              org/picketlink/core/main
>>>>                    - core.jar
>>>>
>>>>              org/picketlink/idm/main
>>>>                    - idm.jar
>>>>
>>>>              org/picketlink/federation/main
>>>>                    - federation.jar
>>>>
>>>>      Any thoughts ?
>>>>
>>>> Regards.
>>>> Pedro Igor
>>>> ______________