On Mon, Jul 7, 2008 at 6:01 PM, Guðmundur Bjarni Ólafsson
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 7, 2008 at 5:50 PM, James Carman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
>> I'm not trying to flame here or anything, but from what I've read of
>> Swarm/Wasp, it's quite complicated and that would go against the
>> spirit of Wicket, IMHO. Also, it uses external files for
>> configuration. Again, this goes against the spirit of Wicket.
>> Perhaps if there were a programmatic way of configuring everything?
>> Again, I've never used it, but I've seen responses on the lists about
>> how to do things and it just scared me away from it. That's just my
>> $0.02. To be fair, maybe I should play with it a bit to see it for
>> myself, but I haven't had the cycles. Sorry.
>>
>
>
> I cooked up a small API that does just this. Simply put, it's just an
> implementation of a HiveFactory which acts as a Builder. I plan to publish
> some time in the near future but there are several small issues that I'd
> like to solve first.
>
> Right now the usage of the API looks like this:
>
> BuilderHiveFactory hiveFactory = new BuilderHiveFactory();
> Principal principal = new SimplePrincipal("whatever");
> Set<Class<? extends WaspAction>> actions = ...;
> actions.add(Inherit.class);
> actions.add(Render.class);
> actions.add(Enable.class);
>
> hiveFactory.addComponentPermission(principal, MySecurePage.class, actions);
>
> I would love to get your thoughts and input on this kind of HiveFactory.
Sounds like a usable contribution :)
The whole idea of the Wasp and Swarm for that matter is that if you
don't like a part of it you easily implement it yourself.
Configuration of all the permissions is only a first step.
Even i don't use the default policy file reader, we do use policy
files but i added some extra scripting support (haven't decided yet if
it something that is really re-usable by others).
So if anyone has anything that he/she thinks is reusable, just let me know.
Maurice
>
> regards,
> Guðmundur Bjarni
>
