On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 9:08 PM, ant elder <antel...@apache.org> wrote: > On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 4:13 PM, Simon Laws <simonsl...@googlemail.com> wrote: >> On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 1:11 PM, ant elder <ant.el...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 9:26 AM, <sl...@apache.org> wrote: >>>> Author: slaws >>>> Date: Tue Jul 5 08:26:12 2011 >>>> New Revision: 1142920 >>>> >>>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1142920&view=rev >>>> Log: >>>> Re-enable Rampart support in the ws binding so that WS policy can be >>>> applied. Add a test which, for the time being, demonstrates integrity. >>>> >>> >>> How hard would it be to change this to be a separate optional module >>> so that if you don't need to use ws security then you don't need to >>> include all the extra jars this brings in? >>> >>> ...ant >>> >> >> I think that could be straightforward. I split out the code that loads >> Rampart but it still sits in the axis integration class inside the ws >> binding modules. Hence the dependencies. . We could put that code in >> a separate module and we'd have to move the WSPolicy model there as >> well. The question would be then how/when rampart gets engaged. >> Possibly we could put it in the policy provider and add a check to >> only engage it if it's not already engaged. We'd have to try it and >> see if the timing works. >> >> Simon >> > > Are you going to do this or are you just talking about it as a > hypothetical thing for the future? > > ...ant >
Just talking about it at the moment. Still mulling over whether having a separate module is a good idea or not. Simon -- Apache Tuscany committer: tuscany.apache.org Co-author of a book about Tuscany and SCA: tuscanyinaction.com
