Mailing-List: contact dev-help@directory.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Apache Directory Developers List" <dev@directory.apache.org>
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of elecharny@gmail.com designates
 74.125.82.44 as permitted sender)
Message-ID: <4EBFA48B.7070406@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2011 12:05:47 +0100
From: Emmanuel Lecharny <elecharny@gmail.com>
Reply-To: elecharny@apache.org
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.6;
 rv:8.0) Gecko/20111105 Thunderbird/8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Apache Directory Developers List <dev@directory.apache.org>
Subject: Interceptors : next steps
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

Hi guys,

after this huge refactoring, I'd like to share the list of remaining 
tasks I foresee regarding interceptors :

- currently, the order is enforced in the 
DefaultDirectoryService.setDefaultInterceptorConfigurations() method. 
This does not sounds good, when the configuration already contains a 
specific order. We need to use the configuration read from the DIT here.
- there are 4 places where we call the interceptor chain from within 
another interceptor : when dealing with schema modification (I have 
posted a mail about it lately). We need to refactor this code.
- we need to implement the two-level interceptors strategy we discussed 
with Alex and Göktürk, a strategy that will allow a user to add an 
interceptor where he wants, without messing with the mandatory ordered 
default interceptors
- we need to add a flag to enable or disable an interceptor at will. 
This flag must be checked when transiting from one interceptor to 
another one
- it would be a great addition to add a way for an admin to inject an 
interceptor into a user's chain (for instance, a logger for debug 
purpose). We have to think about this. That could combine the design of 
a specific extended operation, plus some protected list of interceptor 
manipulation. Not urgent
- last, not list, we have to make the Interceptors OSGi compliant now.

I hope I haven't forgot anything. Feel free to comment !


-- 
Regards,
Cordialement,
Emmanuel Lécharny
www.iktek.com