On 3/15/07, Alex Karasulu <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> Ok so you basically have this LDAPConfiguration bean contained under the
> ServerStartupConfiguration? Meaning I would get and set the
> LDAPConfiguration bean on the ServerStartupConfiguration?
I wouldn't put it under the ServerStartupConfiguration. No point to,
other than lashing two classes together.
Then the user has to use another call to the spring factory thingy to get
this bean by name again. Instead of having a centrally rooted configuration
LdapConfiguration is read via Spring in server-main Service and used
in the ServerContextFactory to start the LDAP protocol providers for
LDAP and LDAPS.
How does this effect the daemon bootstrappers? Will the daemon code work
> In terms of deps this sounds good. You have the LDAPConfig bean in the
> protocol module which the server-jndi module depends on. So this is nice
> because then the server-jndi can just have the subordinate object under the
> SSConfig bean.
Yes, it inverts the relationship between server-jndi and
protocol-ldap. Again, no point to making it a subordinate object of
ServerStartupConfiguration. That unnecessarily makes LDAP
configuration a part of every server.
You mean every service like Kerberos?
How is that?
The issue will be keeping
protocol config consistent with the other 4 protocols we have.
Hmmm I agree with the concept but I don't like this outcome. Perhaps I
just need to see the mechanics of it.
ServerStartupConfiguration is not just for LDAP but for all the services in the
> If this is correct it sounds good to me. I looked at the doco too just now
> ... config looks cleaner. However this bean is under the configuration bean
> in the server.xml file I suspect. Is this correct?
No. Totally separate bean. Again, people may want LDAP (the PP) in
most cases, but not the other protocols. So why not make them all
modular if it is trivial to do so?
Well they can all be modular and separate beans under a single configuration object.
Just get that configuration once from spring and the rest of the other beans are available
using getLdapConfiguration or getKerberosConfiguration etc.
What's wrong with this mechanism?
> Can you elaborate a tiny bit more on the configuration changes in the doco
> just so there are no questions?
Elaborate as to what, specifically?
Just verbally put down what you've changed. A summary of it. What was. What's different now instead of just a configuration snippet. Others looking at this doco will not have a clue right? Think with the perspective of someone new trying to dive in and get involved. Provide enough context so they understand what you did.
Makes sense? You're leaving a trail this way so others can follow what's going on and how we got there.