Looks better to me, not difficult to understand. It'd increase symmetry if we were to add a getPermissionResolver() to PermissionResolverAware interface.
Kalle On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 7:39 AM, Les Hazlewood <[email protected]> wrote: > Per Kalle's comments in the issue, it does sound a bit weird to do this. > > However, I could see how this could be used, i.e. OO Delegation (call > the IniRealm, it delegates to its internal resolver). > > I wonder if there might be a better way? Because it is not common for > Realms to implement this interface directly (and instead delegate to a > resolver component), it feels like an 'implementation detail' to do > this. That is, the end-user has to know that the Realm implements > this interface when it is quite common that Realms do not do this. > > Maybe it can be a bit more explicit and conform to the behavior of any > AuthorizingRealm? For example: > > myRealm.rolePermissionResolver = $iniRealm.rolePermissionResolver > > I'm not sure if this is better - it's just an idea for discussion. > > Thoughts? > > -- > Les Hazlewood | @lhazlewood > CTO, Stormpath | http://stormpath.com | @goStormpath | 888.391.5282 > Stormpath wins GigaOM Structure Launchpad Award! http://bit.ly/MvZkMk > > > On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 12:31 PM, Jared Bunting > <[email protected]> wrote: >> I just wanted to get a quick sentiment on this: >> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SHIRO-371 >> >> It seems useful to me (and was prompted by a question on Stack Overflow) >> but it does add a public interface to a fairly central piece of the core >> library. Are there any objections? >> >> Thanks, >> Jared
