Great, I’ll get started on that. Is there a better name I should use or is everyone fine with sentry-main. I noticed there was a sentry-service module that is not used, perhaps that’s a bit better?
> On Apr 18, 2018, at 2:05 PM, Sergio Pena <sergio.p...@cloudera.com> wrote: > > There have been concerns from other teams about the sentry-provider-db as > well. > I think it makes sense to split it to avoid these dependencies issues. > > Go head, create some jiras to split them. I will recommend creating one > jira per module just to keep the patch simple and easy to review. > > > On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 12:24 PM, Anthony Young-Garner < > anthony.young-gar...@cloudera.com> wrote: > >> I agree that it would be useful to break up the sentry-provider-db module >> in order to allow dependency chains to be more easily expressed and to >> decouple the SentryService entry point from the database model. Are there >> any concerns with the approach Steve suggested? >> >> On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 11:07 AM, Stephen Moist <mo...@cloudera.com> >> wrote: >> >>> So looking at sentry-provider-db, it looks like it’s pretty much the main >>> module of Sentry. It has the thrift apis, db, cli and Sentry Service. >> I’m >>> running into issues with developing ABAC as we have it be it’s own >> module. >>> It depends on sentry-provider-db, and then for me to add it in so that >>> SentryService can take advantage of it, sentry-provider-db depends on >>> sentry-abac so we end up with a circular dependency. Rather than just >>> shove abac into sentry-provider-db, I’m proposing we split >>> sentry-provider-db into sentry-provider-db (the existing db layer), >>> sentry-main/sentry-service, sentry-main/sentry-cli and >>> sentry-main/sentry-api. Thus the dependency chain would be >>> sentry-provider-db -> sentry-service -> sentry-api->sentry-cli and >>> sentry-abac depends on sentry-service, sentry-cli, sentry-api. Thoughts >> on >>> this? >>
