2013/3/24 Mike Müller <[email protected]>: > From: Carsten Ziegeler [mailto:[email protected]] >> This sounds like an interesting idea - what would it need in the >> resource resolver bundle to support this property? > > Not that much. The resource resolver bundle would route calls for > a resource provider with the new property set, through the > ResourceAccessSecurity > service. If no resource provider has set the property, nothing changes. > If no ResourceAccessSecurity service is available but a resource provider > has set the property, access to resources of this provider will not be > allowed by default. > If we take the ResourceAccessSecurity interface out of the Sling API bundle - > as proposed by Alexander and Bertrand - we should make a resourcesecurity-api > bundle to separate the implementation from the API. Resource resolver bundle > then only imports the resourcesecurity-api.
If we add support for calling this service from within the resource resolver bundle, then the interface should definitely stay in the api. We already have different packages with different services implemented by different bundles, so I don't see why we should make a difference here and put it into a different bundle. Carsten > The whole implementation of resourcesecurity-api will then stay in the > Resourceaccesssecurity bundle (or maybe we call it better resourcesecurity to > make it consistent to the api bundle). > > Best regards > Mike > > -- Carsten Ziegeler [email protected]
