shiro-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Les Hazlewood <lhazlew...@apache.org>
Subject Re: SimpleAccountRealm implementing RolePermissionResolver
Date Thu, 12 Jul 2012 14:39:17 GMT
Per Kalle's comments in the issue, it does sound a bit weird to do this.

However, I could see how this could be used, i.e. OO Delegation (call
the IniRealm, it delegates to its internal resolver).

I wonder if there might be a better way?  Because it is not common for
Realms to implement this interface directly (and instead delegate to a
resolver component), it feels like an 'implementation detail' to do
this.  That is, the end-user has to know that the Realm implements
this interface when it is quite common that Realms do not do this.

Maybe it can be a bit more explicit and conform to the behavior of any
AuthorizingRealm?  For example:

myRealm.rolePermissionResolver = $iniRealm.rolePermissionResolver

I'm not sure if this is better - it's just an idea for discussion.

Thoughts?

--
Les Hazlewood | @lhazlewood
CTO, Stormpath | http://stormpath.com | @goStormpath | 888.391.5282
Stormpath wins GigaOM Structure Launchpad Award! http://bit.ly/MvZkMk


On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 12:31 PM, Jared Bunting
<jared.bunting@peachjean.com> wrote:
> I just wanted to get a quick sentiment on this:
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SHIRO-371
>
> It seems useful to me (and was prompted by a question on Stack Overflow)
> but it does add a public interface to a fairly central piece of the core
> library.  Are there any objections?
>
> Thanks,
> Jared

Mime
View raw message