[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6318?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16192963#comment-16192963
 ] 

Alex Deparvu commented on OAK-6318:
-----------------------------------

bq. you copied the classes using the exact same package name
I split the package in two, some of the classes stayed in {{oak-core}}, some 
moved to {{oak-security-spi}}. but both kept the same package name, yes.

bq. That's unstable from an OSGi point of view since some bundles might be 
bound to the import from oak-core and some might be bound to the import from 
oak-security-spi.
agreed. I understand this is an unstable situation, what was interesting is to 
see various platforms react differently (see travis vs jenkins builds).

bq. I did not follow the whole discussion, but maybe copy the affected classes 
to a new package and a new bundle would solve the issue?
There are various branches available if you want to give it a go, I'm quite 
open to suggestions that also come with code.

The bounds are: moving code out of oak-core while also keeping backwards 
compatibility, no major version increase for any package.

> Refactor oak.spi.security into a separate module/bundle
> -------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: OAK-6318
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6318
>             Project: Jackrabbit Oak
>          Issue Type: Task
>          Components: core, security
>            Reporter: angela
>            Assignee: angela
>         Attachments: PropInfo.patch
>
>
> In the light of the modularization effort it would IMHO make a lot of sense 
> to refactor _oak.spi.security.*_ into a separate module/bundle that could be 
> release independent of _oak-core_.
> As far as I could see so far this is currently not easily doable due to the 
> dependency of {{oak.spi.security.*}} on {{oak.plugins.tree}}, which in turn 
> relies on {{o.a.j.oak.query.QueryEngineSettings}} and other oak-core 
> internals (see also OAK-6304). Most likely this issue would therefore require 
> a complete review (and possibly a split) of  the {{oak.plugins.tree}} package 
> space which contains a mixture of utilities and 'API' (like e.g. 
> {{TreeContext}} and {{TreeLocation}})... will open a separate issue for this 
> linking to this one.
> cc: [~stillalex], [~rombert], [~mduerig], [~tmueller]



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)

Reply via email to