shiro-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Les Hazlewood <lhazlew...@apache.org>
Subject Re: DefaultSecurityManager deprecated as of 2.0?
Date Sun, 02 Aug 2015 00:29:26 GMT
Just rename - as a delayed strategy to not break anything until _just
before_ 2.0.0 final.  Basically during the 2.0.0 release process.  Does
that make sense?

On Sat, Aug 1, 2015 at 5:21 PM, Darin Gordon <darinc@gmail.com> wrote:

> DefaultSecurityManager represents the legacy inheritance-based approach
> where as ApplicationSecurityManager represents the new composition-based
> approach.  By re-naming the security manager, as you've initially done in
> v2, developers will be less likely to assume which approach is taken.  In
> other words for your option #2, are you saying that you intend to just
> rename ApplicationSecurityManager to DefaultSecurityManager, or actually
> commingle code?
>
>
>
>
>
> On Sat, Aug 1, 2015 at 7:49 PM, Les Hazlewood <lhazlewood@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
> > Yeah, the idea for deprecating it is that the current
> > DefaultSecurityManager implementation suffers from excessive subclassing,
> > as did other Shiro components in 1.x.  Shiro 2.x favors much more the
> > cleaner OO approach of 'composition over inheritance' where functionality
> > is delegated to components rather than relying on subclasses (and making
> > things more pluggable / flexible in the process).
> >
> > ApplicationSecurityManager is really just a lateral move of the same
> > behavior of DefaultSecurityManager, but in a different class name so
> > dramatic class hierarchy changes don't break people currently compiling
> > against the DefaultSecurityManager hierarchy.
> >
> > So there are two approaches for a 2.0.0 final release that I'm thinking
> > about.  @Deprecate DefaultSecurityManager now to ensure people don't use
> it
> > anymore and then:
> >
> > 1.  delete it permanently, or
> > 2.  copy the ApplicationSecurityManager logic into DefaultSecurityManager
> > at the last minute right before 2.0.0 (making DSM backwards incompatible)
> > and then deleting ApplicationSecurityManager.
> >
> > Both approaches are backwards incompatible, but I prefer #2 just because
> > DefaultSecurityManager is well-known enough such that not having it might
> > have more problems than the compiler errors from having different
> behavior.
> >
> > I'm trying really hard to keep all things backwards compatible, as I
> think
> > that is a worthwhile goal in a well-established project like Shiro, but
> > sometimes 'cleaning house' does more good for the community moving
> forward
> > than having weird / less-well-designed things stick around and
> potentially
> > cause confusion.
> >
> > Thoughts?
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Les
> >
> > On Sat, Aug 1, 2015 at 2:11 PM, Darin Gordon <darinc@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Les
> > >
> > > Would you please confirm that the DefaultSecurityManager is to be
> > > deprecated as of 2.0 , given the ApplicationSecurityManager ?  the
> > > DefaultSecurityManager hasn't been marked @deprecated yet and so I
> wanted
> > > to confirm
> > >
> > >
> > > thanks
> > >
> > > DG
> > >
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message