Hi Nuno, Please attach a patch with your preferred changes to the ticket. Thanks!
On Sat, Apr 13, 2013 at 1:01 PM, Nuno Pedro Jacinto <[email protected]>wrote: > Hello, > > I add an improvement issue for the creation of a roles interface. I think > that it will be preferable to simple take out the final word from the > class. If there is still no objections, please let me know and, if you > prefer, I will make the necessary changes and provide them to you so that > you can validate them (my knowledge of the framework is not enough to make > changes without being controlled, even if the changes in this case are > simple). > Thank you. > > Cheers, > Nuno > > -----Original Message----- > From: Nuno Pedro Jacinto [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: 07 March 2013 20:34 > To: [email protected] > Subject: RE: Final class > org.apache.wicket.authroles.authorization.strategies.role.Roles > > Hello, > > Thank you for your answers. In my case I just need to make a more > efficient way to check some roles for specific actions on one of my > applications. By being able to extend the Roles I can keep the management > of this ones in one class, avoiding having problems on future changes (they > will most probably be done by others and we know how hard is to manage the > code of others even if it is a small application). > Just in case you are wondering, this check is not related with the wicket > authorization classes, that part is manage on the standard way. Is for > validating the visualization of some data by row content. > Does any of you see any inconvenient of requesting this class not to be > final or to be an interface so that I can in one class manage all the role > permissions? > > Thank you. > > Cheers, > Nuno > > -----Original Message----- > From: Sebastien [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: 07 March 2013 16:32 > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Final class > org.apache.wicket.authroles.authorization.strategies.role.Roles > > Hi Nuno, Hi Sven > > Well, I am just curious about the use case (the reason why you want to > extend Roles). > > I think authors (Eelco & Jonathan) had a reason(s) to mark it final. > Probably because this class is related to the security and marking it > final would prevent a security threat by overriding it and making a > "mistake" > inside. Furthermore, maybe is it a way to indicates that roles > usage/handling should be managed using an IAuthorizationStrategy because it > is not the purpose of Roles... > > Thanks & best regards, > Sebastien. > > On Thu, Mar 7, 2013 at 4:16 PM, Sven Meier <[email protected]> wrote: > > > I don't see a particular reason. > > > > Open an issue please. > > > > Sven > > > > > > On 03/07/2013 10:34 AM, Nuno Pedro Jacinto wrote: > > > >> Good morning, > >> > >> Is there a reason why the Roles class is final? > >> Thank you. > >> > >> Cheers, > >> Nuno > >> > > > > > -- Martin Grigorov jWeekend Training, Consulting, Development http://jWeekend.com <http://jweekend.com/>
