P.S.  I just realized I'm still subscribed to Wicket's user and dev lists.

On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 2:00 PM, Les Hazlewood <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> Since there are people using wicketstuff shiro integration already, I
>>> think it'd be nice to have a new major version of the shiro parts if
>>> the changes will be large.  This way the existing community has an
>>> obvious upgrade path without causing confusion.  If it is perceived
>>> that there is more than one wicket-shiro project, it would probably
>>> frustrate and/or fragment the community rather than help it.
>>
>> Les -- I agree with you, however the problem as we see it is that
>> wicketstuff is not authoritative in any way. There are already multiple
>> shiro/ki/jsecurity projects on there, most of which are not maintained in
>> any way. It contains so many abandoned projects which scare off many
>> developers. And the versioning and build process is mostly out of our
>> control.
>
> Shouldn't the existing ki and jsecurity projects be deprecated and
> removed?  One idea I would have is to move all the existing stuff into
> an 'attic' in the existing wicketstuff SVN repo and add your newest
> Shiro integration code to the wicket-shiro directory that already
> exists.  Then you update the documentation to reflect this, and all
> pointers should go to your newest code base.  I could help with this
> since I think I still have committer rights to that repo.  We'd
> naturally have to run it by the community first of course, but if it
> has backing from the Shiro dev team, it would probably make sense to
> the Wicket dev team (I'm guessing).
>
> I think the Wicket and Wicket-stuff community would be fine with this
> approach - it doesn't make sense to maintain the old jsecurity/ki ones
> because they're not being maintained.  It also removes the old garbage
> laying around, cleaning things up for the Wicket community, so there
> is no longer any feeling of fragmentation.
>
>> What Matt, Ryan and I have discussed is potentially contributing the new and
>> much cleaner integration to the shiro project itself, perhaps as a
>> shiro-wicket submodule. I see there is a shiro-quartz integration, so we're
>> hopeful this may be something the shiro devs would be open to. I'm convinced
>> that shiro-wicket would be seen as authoritative and most devs wouldn't
>> consider using the wicketstuff implementations. Is this a realistic goal, or
>> would the shiro team object to something like this?
>
> I think it is awesome that you guys are working to clean this up.
> This is great news!
>
> One of the struggles I have with this is one of maintenance - while I
> believe Wicket is a minor exception due to how many people use Shiro
> with Wicket, as the number of support modules increase, the higher the
> maintenance costs there are to the Shiro dev team.  This is a real
> cost too - documentation, Jira issues, bugs, etc.  It does take time.
>
> My other issue is one of scope.  Shiro is a security framework, and as
> such, it usually sits at a lower level in the framework stack than UI
> frameworks.  In other words, it makes sense for UI frameworks to know
> about and integrate with security, but the opposite doesn't make as
> much sense.
>
> Do you have any sense of whether or not the Wicket dev team is willing
> to support a wicket-shiro module in their own SVN repository instead
> of using wicket-stuff?  Given that we're both ASF projects, and it can
> be modularized away from wicket core quite well, it seems like it
> would be ideal to be part of Wicket proper (instead of just
> WicketStuff).
>
> Since I wrote the initial (very rough) wicket-jsecurity mini project,
> I'd be very happy to help you guys in any way I can.  Let me know if
> you think I should join the wicket dev list if you think this would be
> a good idea.
>
> As a final note, I struggle with this quite a bit - my first and
> foremost desire is to see people happy using Shiro in any application,
> and naturally integration with other frameworks only helps.  It's just
> hard to juggle the time associated with that.
>
> What do you guys think about contacting the Wicket team?
>
> Best,
>
> Les

Reply via email to