directory-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Pierre-Arnaud Marcelot" ...@marcelot.net>
Subject Re: [Triplesec] Thinking of a quick rewrite
Date Tue, 03 Jul 2007 11:28:04 GMT
I'm also interested in.

I'll be happy to give you a hand.

Pierre-Arnaud


On 7/3/07, Alex Karasulu <akarasulu@apache.org> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> For the past couple days I've been looking at migrating Triplesec packages
> and just
> cleaning up the project as a whole since it is pretty much a prototype as
> it stands
> right now.  There are a few things in Triplesec that I have problems with:
>
>
> (0) bring all NOTICE and LICENSE files up to date with review
> (1) It package names are not org.apache.directory.triplesec based
> (2) It uses ApacheDS 1.0.3 and I would like to start using 1.5.x
> (3) It has Jetty integration which I would like to move into ApacheDS and
> inherit
> (4) The schema is a mess and needs to be cleaned up as well as massaged to
> not use
>      safehaus prefixes.
> (5) server.xml file handling to reconfigure the server is a mess with
> dom4j based loading
>      and rewriting so DIT based configuration can significantly clean up
> this mess
> (6) junit extensions for integration testing is causing issues on windows
> and failing
>      even on linux due to some maven peculiarities with classloaders
> (7) very poor logging
> (8) lack of HOTP parameterization per account
> (9) I would like to remove the interceptor used for referential integrity
> and replace it
>      with triggers and stored procedures
> (10) I want the maven build to work using all the tricks we learned to
> stop maven
>       from changing under our feet with snapshotted plugins
> (11) rework the installers to use Chris' work with Tanuki and the various
> installers
>
> Right now I would like to build flexibility into the schema and the format
> to support
> multiple realms.  Also I would like to consider flexibility to support
> JACC however
> it's not the primary aim for now and can be ignored for this quick
> rewrite.
>
> After assessing where we are and what we have to do a rewrite may take
> less effort
> than wrestling with all the problems we have.  Also note that some key
> libraries need
> not be completely rewritten.
>
> I have the month of July only to do this if I do set out to do it.  I also
> need some help
> but this rewrite gives a bunch of us (especially the new comers) a chance
> to get up
> to speed with Triplesec.
>
> So now I have a few questions for the community:
>
> (1) Should we do this rewrite which will take a couple weeks off our
> schedule but
>      may give significant advantages in the future?
> (2) Who is interested in tackling this with me?
>
> If we have enough people and agreement then we can just jump in and get
> started.
>
> Alex
>
>

Mime
View raw message