Since I have no idea about the impact of using Spring 3.0, we could do  
a smaller step and integrate Spring Security 2.0. This should be  
possible without taking to much risk. Would be an option, I do not  
want to wait until next year for Spring 3.0 because I have a time  
frame (12 month max, starting soon)



Quoting Gabriel Roldán <[email protected]>:

> Hi Christian, sounds like a very interesting project.
>
> I would be ok with moving to Spring 3.0, may be we can just schedule
> that for geoserver 2.2.x. I'm not sure when we'll push for a 2.1 release
> but hopefully it won't be that long.
> If at all, a minimal assessment of the incompatibilities and an
> estimation of the effort required would be very much appreciated.I'll
> try to give it a read to the Spring migration guide, but probably moving
> to Spring 3 also means migrating the web app from wicket 1.3 to 1.4?
> I don't think it's gonna be a small task, but worthwhile one.
>
> Best regards,
> Gabriel
>
> On Mon, 2010-10-04 at 13:54 +0200, [email protected] wrote:
>> About Spring 3.0, taken from Spring Security FAQ
>> ********************************************
>> What Java and Spring Framework versions are required?
>>
>>
>> Spring Security 2.0.x requires a minimum JDK version of 1.4 and is
>> built against Spring 2.0.x. It should also be compatible with
>> applications using Spring 2.5.x.
>>
>> Spring Security 3.0 requires JDK 1.5 as a minimum and will also
>> require Spring 3.0.
>> ********************************************
>>
>> I think, we currently use Spring 2.5.5 ?
>>
>> A migration guide is here
>> http://static.springsource.org/spring/docs/upgrade/spring3/html/
>>
>> I think if we want geoserver security on a professional level,  I
>> should study the guide and try to migrate. If you feel that this is a
>> big risk, I have to fall back and use Spring Security 2.0.
>>
>> And btw, thank you for your backup offer.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------
>> This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Virtualization is moving to the mainstream and overtaking non-virtualized
>> environment for deploying applications. Does it make network security
>> easier or more difficult to achieve? Read this whitepaper to separate the
>> two and get a better understanding.
>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/hp-phase2-d2d
>> _______________________________________________
>> Geoserver-devel mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel
>
> --
> Gabriel Roldan
> [email protected]
> Expert service straight from the developers
>
>



----------------------------------------------------------------
This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Virtualization is moving to the mainstream and overtaking non-virtualized
environment for deploying applications. Does it make network security 
easier or more difficult to achieve? Read this whitepaper to separate the 
two and get a better understanding.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/hp-phase2-d2d
_______________________________________________
Geoserver-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel

Reply via email to