Pierre van Rooden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Michiel Meeuwissen wrote: > >Where would the configuration be? That is now 'plugged in' on a completely > >backwards compatible and configurable way. > > Same place? Why would that change?
The configuration is now simply the existing security configuration, so everything is started from security.xml, which is the only file which' location is fixed. Nothing is to be changed in that now. If we integrate it in Authetnication itself, that it's configuration file will become more complex. > Possibly, but if you intend some functionality to be used with every > implementation anwyay (since otherwise whole pieces of the code will > stop working under another security system), it may not be wise to put > it in an 'optional' piece of code. No pieces of code should stop working when you wrap the existing authentication by this. If it does, something is really wrong. The code is optional, because you can simply not use it. In fact I can plug it in on e.g. a 1.7 installation (though then I must write the password in the wrappers configuration). Michiel -- Michiel Meeuwissen | Mediapark C101 Hilversum | +31 (0)35 6772979 | I hate computers nl_NL eo_XX en_US | mihxil' | [] () |
