Unless our Apache Mentors think otherwise, I would think the project
proposal should be in google docs (it is a google proposal, not an Apache
proposal), but when accepted, all the actual project documentation would go
in the Apache wiki.

Cheers,

Les

On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 3:21 PM, Heshan Suriyaarachchi <
[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi Les,
>           You can register as a mentor here [1]. When I am creating the
> proposal, should I do it in a Apache wiki page or  in google docs? which
> method would you prefer?
>
> [1] - http://socghop.appspot.com/org/apply_mentor/google/gsoc2009
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 12:49 AM, Les Hazlewood <[email protected]>wrote:
>
>> Hi Heshan,
>>
>> I'd be happy to mentor.  Where is the link to register as a mentor?
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Les
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 1:10 PM, Heshan Suriyaarachchi <
>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Hey guys,
>>>            Thank you for your feedback. I think that I have enough
>>> information to start writing a proposal for GSoC. We can refine the ideas as
>>> we go through with the project. btw I need a mentor for the project as well
>>> [?]. I hope one of you guys will volunteer to guide me through the
>>> project.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 7:31 PM, Jeremy Haile <[email protected]>wrote:
>>>
>>>> I think before we get too deep in the guts of what things should look
>>>> like, we should first discuss the goals of the project.  I've had many
>>>> people ask me about this sort of thing - usually they are starting a new
>>>> project and want to get the security part of their app (data model, data
>>>> access, UI for managing, etc.) up and running quickly.  They don't want to
>>>> have to think about the data model, building user interfaces for managing
>>>> it, etc.
>>>>
>>>> I think that as the applications grow, the users may then want to extend
>>>> our data model to add additional fields, etc.
>>>>
>>>> The goals I would have for the project would be:
>>>> 1) Provides a basic data model that can be used out-of-the-box
>>>> 2) Provides a war that can be quickly and easily configured and deployed
>>>> to manage security configuration (no coding required!!)
>>>> 3) Provides data access objects that can be used out of the box, or
>>>> replaced if desired (at least JPA, maybe LDAP)
>>>> 4) Allows a user to optionally replace or extend our data model
>>>> 5) Provide this as an optional extension to JSecurity (a completely
>>>> separate module) and not something that is added to the core or required in
>>>> any way
>>>>
>>>> Therefore I think it makes sense to:
>>>> a) Model the data as a set of interfaces that most of the module code
>>>> would reference
>>>> b) Provide basic implementations of this data model that are suitable
>>>> for JPA persistence or LDAP
>>>> c) Provide a service layer for managing the objects that is independent
>>>> of our data access strategy.  I think this service layer should be totally
>>>> separate services (managers) from the ones in jsecurity-core.
>>>> d) Provide DAO interfaces with a couple of implementations - allow the
>>>> user to substitute in their own DAO if desired
>>>> e) Provide a web layer that uses the service layer to manage security
>>>> objects.
>>>> f) The web interface should be a modern, simple, clean interface that
>>>> allows creating, editing, deleting users; creating, editing, and deleting
>>>> roles/permissions; creating, deleting, and assigning users to groups (once
>>>> jsecurity-core supports the concepts of groups)
>>>>
>>>> Jeremy
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Mar 19, 2009, at 9:11 AM, Les Hazlewood wrote:
>>>>
>>>>  Hi Heshan,
>>>>>
>>>>> I think this is a great idea, but it will require some decent thought.
>>>>>
>>>>> Currently JSecurity's API is essentially read-only.  We do this because
>>>>> the
>>>>> data model can and does change significantly across projects.  So, we
>>>>> have
>>>>> things like AuthorizationInfo and AuthenticationInfo interfaces that
>>>>> end-users can implement and return from their Realm implementations
>>>>> which
>>>>> abstracts away their environment from JSecurity.
>>>>>
>>>>> If we would be able to write to one or more datasources, we'd also have
>>>>> to
>>>>> create an API for the concepts that JSecurity does not currently read
>>>>> explicilty.  I'm thinking of Interfaces like:
>>>>>
>>>>> Group
>>>>> Role
>>>>>
>>>>> Maybe we need another Interface like Account to make the associations
>>>>> between Group and Role (account.getGroups() or account.getRoles()).
>>>>>
>>>>> Or maybe there isn't an Account, and we just use Subject for that
>>>>> (Subject.getGroups(), Subject.getRoles()), etc.
>>>>>
>>>>> Role.getPermissions(), Group.getPermissions(),etc.  These are all
>>>>> things
>>>>> that need to be decided upon.  I've done this _many_ times in real
>>>>> applications, and maybe the modeling I have done can be re-used to a
>>>>> large
>>>>> extent.  It is very flexible and handles for a large variety of domain
>>>>> model
>>>>> permutations - something that would be necessary for supporting many
>>>>> applications.
>>>>>
>>>>> Then, after that is decided, we need to come up with a 'service' API
>>>>> that
>>>>> could be called to make the associations.  Maybe that service is just
>>>>> the
>>>>> existing SecurityManager interface.  Things like:
>>>>>
>>>>> createRole( Role role );
>>>>> addRole( PrincipalCollection subjectIdentity, Role role );
>>>>> deleteRole( Serializable roleId);
>>>>> addPermission( Serializable roleId, Permission p);
>>>>>
>>>>> etc.
>>>>>
>>>>> Then we could call this service API to make the changes at runtime.
>>>>>  Then
>>>>> that service would probably delegate to the internal collection of
>>>>> Realms to
>>>>> allow each to respond to the call.  The SecurityManager is probably the
>>>>> best
>>>>> candidate for this type of service work, as it does the same thing but
>>>>> for
>>>>> existing read-only operations.
>>>>>
>>>>> The user agent layer should only just call methods on the
>>>>> SecurityManager
>>>>> such that any user agent technology could be used (command line, web
>>>>> console, swing/flex app, etc).
>>>>>
>>>>> Anyone else have any thoughts or ideas?  Any questions Heshan?
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>
>>>>> Les
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Mar 17, 2009 at 10:59 AM, Heshan Suriyaarachchi <
>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>  Hi Guys,
>>>>>>          I'm planning to take part in Google Summer of Code this year.
>>>>>> I
>>>>>> thought of doing a UI Management Console for managing Groups, Users,
>>>>>> Roles,
>>>>>> and  Permissions for JSecurtiy aka Ki. I need to start on working on a
>>>>>> proposal for GSoC. Therefore I would like to know your feedback on how
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> Management Console be implemented and what functionalities should it
>>>>>> support.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>> Heshan Suriyaarachchi
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://heshans.blogspot.com/
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Regards,
>>> Heshan Suriyaarachchi
>>>
>>> http://heshans.blogspot.com/
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Regards,
> Heshan Suriyaarachchi
>
> http://heshans.blogspot.com/
>

Reply via email to