On 05/18/2011 04:54 PM, Carl Trieloff wrote:
In working a patch to add ownership to the broker model for ACL, I see that bindings are the only object we don't use encode and decode. This meant that the first version of my patch required a change to the encode/decode of binding in the store code. This is a break in abstraction, where the broker should be providing the encode/ decode. The same problem then also exists in the cluster for bindings, in talking with Alan. (below) The idea is to move to an encode/ decode in binding and the update the signature of the MessageStore.h and remove the encode/ decode from the inline code and add an interface method to the Recoverable objects. Unless there are any objections, I'll proceed. My end game is to be able to provide simpler ACL scoping for cloud usage of Qpid brokers, to do so we need the identity of who created which objects.
I don't have any objection however important to explicitly call out any changes that would break backward compatibility for recorded data if that cannot be avoided.
It would also be important to share the design around ACL changes. Again backward compatibility is relevant but even more critical is a well thought out (and well described) permissions model. What we have at present seems quite ad hoc already and we don't want to exacerbate that.
--------------------------------------------------------------------- Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation Project: http://qpid.apache.org Use/Interact: mailto:dev-subscr...@qpid.apache.org
