directory-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Emmanuel Lecharny <>
Subject Re: [LDAP] Merging server-ssl with protocol-ldap
Date Mon, 12 Mar 2007 00:12:15 GMT
Enrique Rodriguez a écrit :

> On 3/11/07, Alex Karasulu <> wrote:
>> ...
> It would be one giant class if it wasn't broken up somehow.  Also,
> there are 2 demux (Hashed Adapters) in there.  This is a big change
> from just Simple authentication.  IMO, breaking it up like this makes
> it easier to follow.

I must admit that it was pretty easy to follow, the way you did it.

> We can't easily use interceptors here without adding interceptor
> infrastructure, while MINA has the IoHandlerChain already.  Other than
> the fact that the Interceptors are more flexible (eg Spring config),
> the IoHandlerChain is "fixed"; you can think of it as a subset of the
> Interceptor functionality and since Trustin worked on both, they are
> similar in semantics.  I think once you get used to it, it won't be
> hard to follow.  Also, both DNS and Kerberos use IoHandlerChain's.
> For Kerberos, in particular, there is no way I would want to remove
> the IoHandlerChain.
> As for ease of testing, I don't see how aggregating all the
> functionality back into one class would help.  Certainly breaking up
> the class into smaller bits in fact increases exposure for testing.

My position here is :
- make it works
- make it configuratble through server.xml
- and then we can criticize and improve.

It's better and more benefical to criticize something which works than a 
concept on a piece of paper... However, I also tend to think that Alex 
concerns about patterns are important, because it's the best solution to 
share and discuss a solution. (even if I'm too old to be a pattern guy :)

> Enrique

View raw message