oltu-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Pid <pids...@apache.org>
Subject Re: API proposal
Date Fri, 18 Jun 2010 14:27:50 GMT
On 18/06/2010 10:25, Simone Tripodi wrote:
> Hi Pid,
> I did just minor reviews to your proposal (maven and svn stuff only)
> and I'd really appreciate if you could, before starting discussing
> about/modifying something:
> 
> * move to proper 'client' package client-only related stuff (it would
> much more clear and easier for me add the server API);

There's only one interface each for Client and Server, all other
interfaces have shared use in both client & server.  Are you suggesting
we move them to:

 o.a.amber.client.OAuthClient
 o.a.amber.server.OAuthServer

?


> * move your custom XML stuff to a dedicated module, since is not
> contained in the spec and doesn't match neither with OAuth Discovery
> 1.0;

I don't think this is necessary.  It only exists in the o.a.amber.OAuth
class and it's for entirely local pre-use configuration.  It's not an
alternative to OAuth Discovery.

It maps XML configuration files to the OAuthConsumer & OAuthProvider
interfaces via JAXB and provides the discovered data to the factory
object.  The implementation only need to specify where to find the
concrete classes which implement these interfaces & JAXB does the rest
it's very efficient and makes it super easy for a developer to use the
library, by dropping some XML in the proper location.

It meets our stated goal of providing multiple configuration methods.


> * just write 2 lines on the ML about how the interfaces interact with
> each other, something simple like I did in a previous email.

2 lines might be tricky!

The o.a.amber.OAuth class is the only one with code and it's just for
processing the different methods of configuration, discovering
implementations, then configuring a factory object which can create a
client or a server.

OAuthClient has plenty of JavaDoc.

OAuthServer isn't defined yet, but I have some ideas.


p



> Many thanks in advance, have a nice day!
> Simo
> 
> http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
> http://www.99soft.org/
> 
> 
> 
> On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 2:51 PM, Simone Tripodi
> <simone.tripodi@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi Pid,
>> seen the commit, thanks, just give me the time to digest it :P I have
>> proposals for storages, already experienced in the past and part of it
>> is already contained in the existing code.
>> Chat later,
>> Simo
>>
>> http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
>> http://www.99soft.org/
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 2:29 PM, Pid <pid@pidster.com> wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I've committed a proposal for the API spec, it aims to simplify the
>>> interaction with the library and focuses on configuration and setup.
>>>
>>> There are a couple of things to consider in the light of recent
>>> discussion, which I don't have proposals for as yet, namely:
>>>
>>>  1. configurable storage of some sort
>>>
>>>  2. the possible need to separate client & server factories
>>>
>>>  3. the server interface methods are not defined
>>>
>>>
>>> Please critique/discuss.
>>>
>>>
>>> p
>>>
>>>
>>



Mime
View raw message