Dims, did u make a mistake on the mailing list?? Shouldn't it be [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sanjiva. On Wed, 2005-08-24 at 09:07 -0700, Granqvist, Hans wrote: > Hi all, > > The main raison d'etre of TSIK was always simplicity. As it is now, > TSIK runtime has only one single dependency, and that is on the > ubiquitous log4j. > > The freedom of a single jar, of a single download/compile to get > XML/SOAP security related stuff going, without worrying about this > and that other jar is very refreshing. It makes it difficult for > the developer to screw up inadvertently. > > Again, simplicity is key, both for developers and deployers. To > the greatest extent possible, I'd hate to lose that "instant > usability" of TSIK. > > Also, since TSIK is still in incubation, I don't know whether it > is prudent to depend on it too much. Could this not be a show- > stopper? > > So, in theory the idea of pooling resources sounds good but I'm not > convinced yet, for the above stated reasons. I have to think a bit. > > That said, I have only started in earnest looking at wss4j yesterday. > I will know more what I think about everything in a while. :) > > Dims, do you have a simple sketch/outline how you see the various > wss4j/tsik packages broken out and working together? That would > definitely help me grok your plan. > > Thanks, > Hans > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Sanjiva Weerawarana [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Wednesday, August 24, 2005 7:58 AM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Cc: [email protected]; [email protected] > > Subject: Re: WSS4J and TSIK > > > > +1 .. I'd like to see TSIK broken up a bit more (and maybe appropriate > > parts moved to commons even?). > > > > Sanjiva. > > > > On Tue, 2005-08-23 at 11:16 -0400, Davanum Srinivas wrote: > > > Hans, > > > > > > [CC'ing wss4j-dev mailing list] > > > > > > Can we make/keep TSIK a soap engine agnostic toolkit (remove the > > > soap/transport stuff)? Then we can then position WSS4J as a project > > > for implementing ws-security in specific soap engines like JAX-RPC, > > > Axis 1.X and Axis 2.X. > > > > > > I'd also highly recommend abstracting out portions of WSS4J > > behind an > > > interface/factory such that we can plugin in TSIK based > > implementation > > > (and keep the existing implementation for some time since > > folks depend > > > on existing behavior). This way we can have implement OASIS > > > WS-Security 1.1 just in TSIK and automatically get WSS4J upgraded > > > instead of writing it twice. Same goes for say Kerberos > > token profile > > > or other profiles that we think are important. > > > > > > What do you think? > > > > > > thanks, > > > dims > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
