[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-3434?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14902761#comment-14902761
]
Chetan Mehrotra commented on OAK-3434:
--------------------------------------
As mentioned before I am still not clear on what is the actual problem here.
# Break in backward compatibility of SecurityProviderImpl - There are users
which are extending SecurityProviderImpl in OSGi and current approach would
cause a breaking change. If thats the case then as mentioned before most likely
such a usage of security provider is not possible. So lets first have a
testcase which demonstrate such kind of usage and see how it gets broken
# Break in backward compatibility of {{org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.security}}
package - as this package contains certain other classes causing a breaking
change in SecurityProviderImpl would lead to major version increment. If that
is the case then it more of problem of getting BND check passed only.
So can it be determined whats the actual problem here?
> Revert backwards-incompatible changes to SecurityProviderImpl
> -------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: OAK-3434
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-3434
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: security
> Reporter: Francesco Mari
> Assignee: Francesco Mari
> Fix For: 1.3.7
>
> Attachments: OAK-3434-01.patch
>
>
> OAK-3201 introduced some backwards-incompatible changes to
> {{SecurityProviderImpl}}. It should be investigated if those changes can be
> reverted to maintain the backwards compatibility of the
> {{org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.security}} package.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
