sungwy commented on code in PR #4409:
URL: https://github.com/apache/polaris/pull/4409#discussion_r3281758202


##########
polaris-core/src/main/java/org/apache/polaris/core/auth/AuthorizationIntent.java:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,74 @@
+/*
+ * Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) under one
+ * or more contributor license agreements.  See the NOTICE file
+ * distributed with this work for additional information
+ * regarding copyright ownership.  The ASF licenses this file
+ * to you under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the
+ * "License"); you may not use this file except in compliance
+ * with the License.  You may obtain a copy of the License at
+ *
+ *   http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
+ *
+ * Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing,
+ * software distributed under the License is distributed on an
+ * "AS IS" BASIS, WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY
+ * KIND, either express or implied.  See the License for the
+ * specific language governing permissions and limitations
+ * under the License.
+ */
+package org.apache.polaris.core.auth;
+
+import jakarta.annotation.Nonnull;
+import jakarta.annotation.Nullable;
+import org.apache.polaris.core.entity.PolarisEntityType;
+
+/** Authorization intent describing an operation and its target resource 
shape. */
+public sealed interface AuthorizationIntent
+    permits TargetlessAuthorizationIntent,
+        SingleTargetAuthorizationIntent,
+        PairwiseTargetAuthorizationIntent {
+  static AuthorizationIntent of(@Nonnull PolarisAuthorizableOperation 
operation) {
+    return new TargetlessAuthorizationIntent(operation);
+  }
+
+  static AuthorizationIntent of(
+      @Nonnull PolarisAuthorizableOperation operation, @Nonnull 
PolarisSecurable target) {
+    return new SingleTargetAuthorizationIntent(operation, target);
+  }
+
+  static AuthorizationIntent of(
+      @Nonnull PolarisAuthorizableOperation operation,
+      @Nullable PolarisSecurable target,
+      @Nullable PolarisSecurable secondary) {
+    return new PairwiseTargetAuthorizationIntent(operation, target, secondary);
+  }
+
+  @Nonnull
+  PolarisAuthorizableOperation getOperation();
+
+  @Nullable
+  PolarisSecurable getTarget();

Review Comment:
   Thanks again for both of your thoughts @dimas-b and @flyrain I thought a bit 
more about the tradeoff you pointed out, and I think I understand your concerns 
more clearly now.
   
   What clicked for me is that there are probably two different consumer models 
here. For `PolarisAuthorizerImpl` and likely `RangerPolarisAuthorizer`, the 
implementation really owns the authorization semantics locally, so reacting to 
new `AuthorizationIntent` shapes explicitly is actually desirable (like 
`TertiaryAuthorizationIntent`. In that case, switch-case seems desirable rather 
than an operational burden, because we want the introduction of a new subtype 
to force `PolarisAuthorizer` logic to be reviewed and updated.
   
   OpaPolarisAuthorizer feels a bit different because it is thinner and the 
effective policy logic lives in Rego outside Polaris. That initially made me 
wonder whether there was value in preserving a simpler projection for such 
consumers even if the core model stays sealed and typed. But the more I thought 
about it, the more marginal that compatibility benefit seemed if authorizers 
like `PolarisAuthorizerImpl` and `RangerPolarisAuthorizer` still need explicit 
handling through switch-case anyway.
   
   So I'm beginning to learn towards not having `Nullable` `getTarget()` and 
`getSecondary()` in the sealed interface, and having those methods only exposed 
in the subtypes that have those attributes, and rely on the consumers to use 
explicit switch case handling instead, aligning with @flyrain 's suggestion:
   
   ```
   switch (intent) {
     case TargetlessAuthorizationIntent t -> ...
     case SingleTargetAuthorizationIntent s -> ... s.target() ...        // 
@Nonnull
     case PairwiseTargetAuthorizationIntent p -> ... p.target(), p.secondary() 
...
   }
   ```



-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]

Reply via email to