On 5/29/07, Jan Kriesten [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Why re-invent the wheel with Wasp/Swarm?
The same question could be asked when acegi was introduced, or any
other security framework for that matter.
The simple answer is because it things differently and hopes to solves
problems not addressed
What makes me wonder is, using Acegi as a Filter means not to use
component-based authorization. But it should be possible to integrate Acegi
into
the application and all Filter-gotchas should be resolvable. Or am I missing
something?
You're right, if you really want, you can use URL based
hi maurice,
i didn't want to stat a framework war... ;-)
my point was just to understand why you started a new thing. i'm currently in
the process of selecting a authentication/authorization framework, too. it
should be highly flexible, so it can integrated in very different environments.
hi eelco,
You're right, if you really want, you can use URL based authorization.
you got me wrong, i was thinking to integrate acegi into the app like wasp/swarm
is doing and so have an acegi-interface that can be used on component-level. so,
best of both worlds.
best regards, --- jan.
On 5/29/07, Jan Kriesten [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
what i was thinking about was - instead of using acegi as a filter and use it
on
urls - integrate it in the wicket-app and act on top of the components. this
sounds like the wasp/swarm-concepts, only that acegi is the base.
what i really
I am sorry if i made you think i was accusing you of starting a
framework war, i was merely stating i didn't want to start one :).
I am only just reading up on acegi, but what i learned so far is that
acegi was designed for spring just like swarm is for wicket so trying
to integrate either in the
what i was thinking about was - instead of using acegi as a filter and use it
on
urls - integrate it in the wicket-app and act on top of the components. this
sounds like the wasp/swarm-concepts, only that acegi is the base.
It's definitively possible to use Acegi ACL stuff with Wicket's auth
hi martijn,
what i really dislike about acegi is the spring/xml-stuff. but that's another
story... ;-)
If you take the spring/xml and the URL based authorization out of
Acegi, what is left?
Not a stab at Acegi, just asking.
hehe - now i'm having to argue pro acegi where i'm not yet
hi eelco,
It's definitively possible to use Acegi ACL stuff with Wicket's auth
model. You'll have to build it yourself, but once you know you're way
around Acegi and you exactly what your requirements are, implementing
it shouldn't be too difficult.
see my post to martijn - having the
True, Swarm does not yet provide blackbox authentication against ldap,
cas or whatever else, but it allows you to customize your own
authentication allowing you to implement any of those models. And the
time not spend on fixing all your urls for acegi can now be spend on
implementing cas or ldap
On 5/29/07, Jan Kriesten [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
hi eelco,
It's definitively possible to use Acegi ACL stuff with Wicket's auth
model. You'll have to build it yourself, but once you know you're way
around Acegi and you exactly what your requirements are, implementing
it shouldn't be
And the time not spend on fixing all your urls for acegi
Acegi is layered. It has auth models that don't depend on URLs. For
instance there is a fairly sophisticated (at least at first sight) ACL
mechanism last time I looked.
Eelco
hi eelco,
Yeah, makes sense. Contributions are welcome of course. We don't mind
having competing implementations; it'll only make them better :)
hehe, i'll keep you posted. ;-)
--- jan.
-
This SF.net email is
I don't mind the competition. But it might be a good idea if we can
all agree on some common api. for that reason i made wasp. Off course
nothing is written in stone so if you have some suggestions I'll be
happy to listen to them. Just take a look at wasp, is all i ask.
Maurice
On 5/29/07, Jan
I don't mind the competition. But it might be a good idea if we can
all agree on some common api. for that reason i made wasp. Off course
nothing is written in stone so if you have some suggestions I'll be
happy to listen to them. Just take a look at wasp, is all i ask.
Yeah, I agree that
Don't worry, i like committees about as much as how far i can throw them :)
Maurice
On 5/29/07, Eelco Hillenius [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't mind the competition. But it might be a good idea if we can
all agree on some common api. for that reason i made wasp. Off course
nothing is
16 matches
Mail list logo
