Re: MP-JWT progress

[Romain Manni-Bucau]

Jwt-auth impl doesnt depend on tomee and is reusable so must not be put in
tomee codebase.

Hope it is clearer this time.

Le 19 mars 2018 18:54, "John D. Ament"  a écrit :

> On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 3:20 AM Romain Manni-Bucau 
> wrote:
>
> > 2018-03-19 0:07 GMT+01:00 John D. Ament :
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> On Sun, Mar 18, 2018 at 5:38 PM Romain Manni-Bucau <
> rmannibu...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Le 18 mars 2018 21:29, "David Blevins"  a
> >>> écrit :
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> > On Mar 18, 2018, at 12:43 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> >>> rmannibu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> >
> >>> > 1. code will be at geronimo - whatever happens at tomee
> >>>
> >>> As far as I understand the topic is still open and no git repos have
> >>> been created anywhere yet, is that right?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Yes
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Is there anyone on the Geronimo side who would be open to collaborating
> >>> on a reusable JWT library under the TomEE project for a change?
> Something
> >>> not branded tomee or geronimo.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> This is what was proposed to be created @g which is just an umbrella,
> no
> >>> more a project delivery by itself.
> >>>
> >>> Are you against/-1ing g-jwt-auth?
> >>>
> >>
> >> As mentioned elsewhere in the thread, I am against bringing something in
> >> geronimo that is TomEE specific.  I haven't looked at the code (as far
> as I
> >> can tell, nothing is linked in this thread so I have no idea if code
> even
> >> exists) but based on what I've seen with implementing JWT it's closely
> tied
> >> to your container.  So I don't believe its a good fit.
> >>
> >> Why is your preference to bring this into geronimo?
> >>
> >
> > As mentionned there is no link to TomEE in the jwt-auth codebase so no
> > reason to hold that code in something not reusable at tomee.
> >
>
>
> Too many negatives in that sentence to make sense of what you're trying to
> say.
>
>
> >
> >
> >>
> >>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> -David
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >
>

Re: MP-JWT progress

[John D. Ament]

On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 3:20 AM Romain Manni-Bucau 
wrote:

> 2018-03-19 0:07 GMT+01:00 John D. Ament :
>
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Mar 18, 2018 at 5:38 PM Romain Manni-Bucau 
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Le 18 mars 2018 21:29, "David Blevins"  a
>>> écrit :
>>>
>>>
>>> > On Mar 18, 2018, at 12:43 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
>>> rmannibu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > 1. code will be at geronimo - whatever happens at tomee
>>>
>>> As far as I understand the topic is still open and no git repos have
>>> been created anywhere yet, is that right?
>>>
>>>
>>> Yes
>>>
>>>
>>> Is there anyone on the Geronimo side who would be open to collaborating
>>> on a reusable JWT library under the TomEE project for a change?  Something
>>> not branded tomee or geronimo.
>>>
>>>
>>> This is what was proposed to be created @g which is just an umbrella, no
>>> more a project delivery by itself.
>>>
>>> Are you against/-1ing g-jwt-auth?
>>>
>>
>> As mentioned elsewhere in the thread, I am against bringing something in
>> geronimo that is TomEE specific.  I haven't looked at the code (as far as I
>> can tell, nothing is linked in this thread so I have no idea if code even
>> exists) but based on what I've seen with implementing JWT it's closely tied
>> to your container.  So I don't believe its a good fit.
>>
>> Why is your preference to bring this into geronimo?
>>
>
> As mentionned there is no link to TomEE in the jwt-auth codebase so no
> reason to hold that code in something not reusable at tomee.
>


Too many negatives in that sentence to make sense of what you're trying to
say.


>
>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -David
>>>
>>>
>>>
>

Re: MP-JWT progress

[Romain Manni-Bucau]

2018-03-19 0:07 GMT+01:00 John D. Ament :

>
>
> On Sun, Mar 18, 2018 at 5:38 PM Romain Manni-Bucau 
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Le 18 mars 2018 21:29, "David Blevins"  a
>> écrit :
>>
>>
>> > On Mar 18, 2018, at 12:43 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau 
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > 1. code will be at geronimo - whatever happens at tomee
>>
>> As far as I understand the topic is still open and no git repos have been
>> created anywhere yet, is that right?
>>
>>
>> Yes
>>
>>
>> Is there anyone on the Geronimo side who would be open to collaborating
>> on a reusable JWT library under the TomEE project for a change?  Something
>> not branded tomee or geronimo.
>>
>>
>> This is what was proposed to be created @g which is just an umbrella, no
>> more a project delivery by itself.
>>
>> Are you against/-1ing g-jwt-auth?
>>
>
> As mentioned elsewhere in the thread, I am against bringing something in
> geronimo that is TomEE specific.  I haven't looked at the code (as far as I
> can tell, nothing is linked in this thread so I have no idea if code even
> exists) but based on what I've seen with implementing JWT it's closely tied
> to your container.  So I don't believe its a good fit.
>
> Why is your preference to bring this into geronimo?
>

As mentionned there is no link to TomEE in the jwt-auth codebase so no
reason to hold that code in something not reusable at tomee.


>
>
>>
>>
>>
>> -David
>>
>>
>>

Re: MP-JWT progress

[David Blevins]

> On Mar 18, 2018, at 2:38 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau  wrote:
> 
> Are you against/-1ing g-jwt-auth?

I wouldn't do that, but it's also clear to me the discussion in this thread can 
be significantly clearer.  Objections were made that weren't resolved.  The 
discussion started as what do "we" do with we meaning TomEE and Geronimo.  At 
some point in the middle it was stated Geronimo has already made a decision.  I 
also have the feeling people may have opinions that are in-between a full TomEE 
vs Geronimo decision, such as wanting to put work into inching closer to get a 
better view before deciding.

I think all these things are fine, but we need some healthy votes so people can 
move forward with clear support.


-David

Re: MP-JWT progress

[John D. Ament]

On Sun, Mar 18, 2018 at 5:38 PM Romain Manni-Bucau 
wrote:

>
>
> Le 18 mars 2018 21:29, "David Blevins"  a écrit :
>
>
> > On Mar 18, 2018, at 12:43 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau 
> wrote:
> >
> > 1. code will be at geronimo - whatever happens at tomee
>
> As far as I understand the topic is still open and no git repos have been
> created anywhere yet, is that right?
>
>
> Yes
>
>
> Is there anyone on the Geronimo side who would be open to collaborating on
> a reusable JWT library under the TomEE project for a change?  Something not
> branded tomee or geronimo.
>
>
> This is what was proposed to be created @g which is just an umbrella, no
> more a project delivery by itself.
>
> Are you against/-1ing g-jwt-auth?
>

As mentioned elsewhere in the thread, I am against bringing something in
geronimo that is TomEE specific.  I haven't looked at the code (as far as I
can tell, nothing is linked in this thread so I have no idea if code even
exists) but based on what I've seen with implementing JWT it's closely tied
to your container.  So I don't believe its a good fit.

Why is your preference to bring this into geronimo?


>
>
>
> -David
>
>
>

Re: MP-JWT progress

[Romain Manni-Bucau]

Le 18 mars 2018 21:29, "David Blevins"  a écrit :


> On Mar 18, 2018, at 12:43 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau 
wrote:
>
> 1. code will be at geronimo - whatever happens at tomee

As far as I understand the topic is still open and no git repos have been
created anywhere yet, is that right?


Yes


Is there anyone on the Geronimo side who would be open to collaborating on
a reusable JWT library under the TomEE project for a change?  Something not
branded tomee or geronimo.


This is what was proposed to be created @g which is just an umbrella, no
more a project delivery by itself.

Are you against/-1ing g-jwt-auth?



-David

Re: MP-JWT progress

[David Blevins]

> On Mar 18, 2018, at 12:43 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau  
> wrote:
> 
> 1. code will be at geronimo - whatever happens at tomee

As far as I understand the topic is still open and no git repos have been 
created anywhere yet, is that right?

Is there anyone on the Geronimo side who would be open to collaborating on a 
reusable JWT library under the TomEE project for a change?  Something not 
branded tomee or geronimo.


-David

Re: MP-JWT progress

[Romain Manni-Bucau]

2018-03-18 20:38 GMT+01:00 David Blevins :

> In case that wasn't clear, gentle objection to moving this now.
>
> If we can get this merged and at least a snapshot out, that'd be preferred.
>

I'm not following the rational here. Let me try to summarize another time
for you to ensure we speak of the same thing:

1. code will be at geronimo - whatever happens at tomee
2. code we worked on with JL has no tomee dependency (see 4 to be complete
here)
3. as the MP-Config work Roberto did, we'll need a TCK module (next to the
Roberto's one) for jwt-auth spec + a modification of the MP distro
4. TomEE had some propagation bug we need to fix - MP or not since it
happens with a plain servlet

So the JWT-Auth PR for TomEE can be:

A. this one which means TomEE will have an implementation of JWT-Auth and
Geronimo another one
B. the JWT-Auth code moves to Geronimo and TomEE merges from this PR 3 and 4

Just to restate it since it seems we restart from a blank page ;): I'm -1
on A to avoid to split our effort and noise as ASF and +1 for B.


>
>
> --
> David Blevins
> http://twitter.com/dblevins
> http://www.tomitribe.com
>
> On Mar 18, 2018, at 12:26 PM, David Blevins 
> wrote:
>
> I'd lean towards the side of John Ament and Jon Gallimore.  Can we merge
> this at least?
>
>
> -David
>
> On Mar 9, 2018, at 3:20 AM, John D. Ament  wrote:
>
> I don't think its a good idea to move TomEE code into Geronimo.
>
> On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 5:50 AM Romain Manni-Bucau 
> wrote:
>
> If there is no other comment, any objection to move it to
> geronimo-jwt-auth? (let say if not we do it on monday european time)
>
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>  | Old Blog
>  | Github
>  | LinkedIn
>  | Book
>  ee-8-high-performance>
>
> 2018-03-06 11:11 GMT+01:00 Romain Manni-Bucau :
>
>
> 2018-03-06 10:24 GMT+01:00 Jean-Louis Monteiro 
> :
>
> Hi community,
>
>
> So we now have something close in terms of MP-JWT implementation.
>
> With the playground branch I've been working on (Thanks Romain for the
> help), we now pass 100% of the TCK (including a missing part in MP-JWT
> TCK
> I have eagerly added - see ticket on MP-JWT).
>
> Now the question is how do we proceed?
> Knowing that most of the code is not TomEE specific.
>
>
> I'd move it to G to a new git repo keeping only the tck exec - a bit like
> Roberto started with config. I'll be happy to help fixing the small
> remaining enhancements to do (jwt parsing based on jsonb/p, config etc).
>
>
>
> Only few things are in the TomcatSecurityService but that can remain in
> TomEE because it's not really MP-JWT specific either.
>
>
> +1, was overdue anyway for our servlet-ejb integration
>
>
>
> Here is the PR for discussion
> https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/123
>
> Cheers
> Jean-Louis
>
>
> --
> Jean-Louis Monteiro
> http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
> http://www.tomitribe.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Re: MP-JWT progress

[David Blevins]

In case that wasn't clear, gentle objection to moving this now.

If we can get this merged and at least a snapshot out, that'd be preferred.


-- 
David Blevins
http://twitter.com/dblevins
http://www.tomitribe.com

> On Mar 18, 2018, at 12:26 PM, David Blevins  wrote:
> 
> I'd lean towards the side of John Ament and Jon Gallimore.  Can we merge this 
> at least?
> 
> 
> -David
> 
>> On Mar 9, 2018, at 3:20 AM, John D. Ament  wrote:
>> 
>> I don't think its a good idea to move TomEE code into Geronimo.
>> 
>> On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 5:50 AM Romain Manni-Bucau 
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> If there is no other comment, any objection to move it to
>>> geronimo-jwt-auth? (let say if not we do it on monday european time)
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>>> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>>>  | Old Blog
>>>  | Github
>>>  | LinkedIn
>>>  | Book
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 2018-03-06 11:11 GMT+01:00 Romain Manni-Bucau :
>>> 
 
 2018-03-06 10:24 GMT+01:00 Jean-Louis Monteiro 
 :
 
> Hi community,
> 
> 
> So we now have something close in terms of MP-JWT implementation.
> 
> With the playground branch I've been working on (Thanks Romain for the
> help), we now pass 100% of the TCK (including a missing part in MP-JWT
> TCK
> I have eagerly added - see ticket on MP-JWT).
> 
> Now the question is how do we proceed?
> Knowing that most of the code is not TomEE specific.
> 
 
 I'd move it to G to a new git repo keeping only the tck exec - a bit like
 Roberto started with config. I'll be happy to help fixing the small
 remaining enhancements to do (jwt parsing based on jsonb/p, config etc).
 
 
> 
> Only few things are in the TomcatSecurityService but that can remain in
> TomEE because it's not really MP-JWT specific either.
> 
 
 +1, was overdue anyway for our servlet-ejb integration
 
 
> 
> Here is the PR for discussion
> https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/123
> 
> Cheers
> Jean-Louis
> 
> 
> --
> Jean-Louis Monteiro
> http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
> http://www.tomitribe.com
> 
 
 
>>> 
> 

Re: MP-JWT progress

[Romain Manni-Bucau]

@JL: ok I let you do

@David: hmm, not sure which part I missed but there is nothing to merge
except the TCK part which requires to extract it from the PR. This is what
JL will do tmr so we can merge it after.


Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau  |  Blog
 | Old Blog
 | Github  |
LinkedIn  | Book


2018-03-18 20:26 GMT+01:00 David Blevins :

> I'd lean towards the side of John Ament and Jon Gallimore.  Can we merge
> this at least?
>
>
> -David
>
> > On Mar 9, 2018, at 3:20 AM, John D. Ament  wrote:
> >
> > I don't think its a good idea to move TomEE code into Geronimo.
> >
> > On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 5:50 AM Romain Manni-Bucau  >
> > wrote:
> >
> >> If there is no other comment, any objection to move it to
> >> geronimo-jwt-auth? (let say if not we do it on monday european time)
> >>
> >>
> >> Romain Manni-Bucau
> >> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
> >>  | Old Blog
> >>  | Github
> >>  | LinkedIn
> >>  | Book
> >>  ee-8-high-performance>
> >>
> >> 2018-03-06 11:11 GMT+01:00 Romain Manni-Bucau :
> >>
> >>>
> >>> 2018-03-06 10:24 GMT+01:00 Jean-Louis Monteiro <
> jlmonte...@tomitribe.com>
> >>> :
> >>>
>  Hi community,
> 
> 
>  So we now have something close in terms of MP-JWT implementation.
> 
>  With the playground branch I've been working on (Thanks Romain for the
>  help), we now pass 100% of the TCK (including a missing part in MP-JWT
>  TCK
>  I have eagerly added - see ticket on MP-JWT).
> 
>  Now the question is how do we proceed?
>  Knowing that most of the code is not TomEE specific.
> 
> >>>
> >>> I'd move it to G to a new git repo keeping only the tck exec - a bit
> like
> >>> Roberto started with config. I'll be happy to help fixing the small
> >>> remaining enhancements to do (jwt parsing based on jsonb/p, config
> etc).
> >>>
> >>>
> 
>  Only few things are in the TomcatSecurityService but that can remain
> in
>  TomEE because it's not really MP-JWT specific either.
> 
> >>>
> >>> +1, was overdue anyway for our servlet-ejb integration
> >>>
> >>>
> 
>  Here is the PR for discussion
>  https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/123
> 
>  Cheers
>  Jean-Louis
> 
> 
>  --
>  Jean-Louis Monteiro
>  http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
>  http://www.tomitribe.com
> 
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
>
>

Re: MP-JWT progress

[David Blevins]

I'd lean towards the side of John Ament and Jon Gallimore.  Can we merge this 
at least?


-David

> On Mar 9, 2018, at 3:20 AM, John D. Ament  wrote:
> 
> I don't think its a good idea to move TomEE code into Geronimo.
> 
> On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 5:50 AM Romain Manni-Bucau 
> wrote:
> 
>> If there is no other comment, any objection to move it to
>> geronimo-jwt-auth? (let say if not we do it on monday european time)
>> 
>> 
>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>>  | Old Blog
>>  | Github
>>  | LinkedIn
>>  | Book
>> 
>> 
>> 2018-03-06 11:11 GMT+01:00 Romain Manni-Bucau :
>> 
>>> 
>>> 2018-03-06 10:24 GMT+01:00 Jean-Louis Monteiro 
>>> :
>>> 
 Hi community,
 
 
 So we now have something close in terms of MP-JWT implementation.
 
 With the playground branch I've been working on (Thanks Romain for the
 help), we now pass 100% of the TCK (including a missing part in MP-JWT
 TCK
 I have eagerly added - see ticket on MP-JWT).
 
 Now the question is how do we proceed?
 Knowing that most of the code is not TomEE specific.
 
>>> 
>>> I'd move it to G to a new git repo keeping only the tck exec - a bit like
>>> Roberto started with config. I'll be happy to help fixing the small
>>> remaining enhancements to do (jwt parsing based on jsonb/p, config etc).
>>> 
>>> 
 
 Only few things are in the TomcatSecurityService but that can remain in
 TomEE because it's not really MP-JWT specific either.
 
>>> 
>>> +1, was overdue anyway for our servlet-ejb integration
>>> 
>>> 
 
 Here is the PR for discussion
 https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/123
 
 Cheers
 Jean-Louis
 
 
 --
 Jean-Louis Monteiro
 http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
 http://www.tomitribe.com
 
>>> 
>>> 
>> 

Re: MP-JWT progress

[Jean-Louis Monteiro]

I can do it tomorrow morning romain

Le 18 mars 2018 18:31, "Romain Manni-Bucau"  a
écrit :

> quick heads up: if no objection in between I plan to start creating the
> project tomorrow to let JL importing the code he did.
>
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>  | Old Blog
>  | Github  rmannibucau> |
> LinkedIn  | Book
>  ee-8-high-performance>
>
> 2018-03-12 16:33 GMT+01:00 Rudy De Busscher :
>
> > OK (non-binding of course :) for generic classes at Geronimo.
> >
> > On 12 March 2018 at 16:01, Jean-Louis Monteiro  >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > So what's the conclusion here?
> > >
> > > Should I request a git repo on geronimo and extract all generic classes
> > > there along side with other implementations?
> > > Or do you guys prefer another tomee repo with the MP-JWT impl?
> > >
> > > I don't mind if they go here and there, just need to know so I can move
> > on
> > > with the contribution.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Jean-Louis Monteiro
> > > http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
> > > http://www.tomitribe.com
> > >
> > > On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 2:15 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> > rmannibu...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > 2018-03-09 12:37 GMT+01:00 Jonathan Gallimore <
> > > > jonathan.gallim...@gmail.com>
> > > > :
> > > >
> > > > > Currently this in a PR, so it hasn't actually been merged anywhere.
> > > > There's
> > > > > some at least some TomEE specific code, so some modules need
> defining
> > > > > before it can be "moved" in my view.
> > > > >
> > > > > Rudy's point is good one - no doubt a generic, reusable module may
> > well
> > > > be
> > > > > what we end up with. Wherever that lives when it has clearly been
> > > > defined,
> > > > > it needs documenting and showing how to use it.
> > > > >
> > > > > We talked previously about being able to have modules in separate
> > repos
> > > > > under TomEE. Is there some issue with doing that? What's the rush
> to
> > > > shift
> > > > > this off to Geronimo?
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > No rush, geronimo will have a jwt-auth impl and I was waiting JL push
> > > what
> > > > he did before speaking of creating a project @G. I would like to
> share
> > > the
> > > > same impl with tomee to avoid to x2 the effort. however if not
> desired
> > it
> > > > is fine as well.
> > > >
> > > > It is also important to keep in mind that on tomee side there is *no*
> > > > specific code, only fixes in the propagation which also impact
> > > webprofile,
> > > > nothing linked to MP or this particular spec.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Jon
> > > > >
> > > > > On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 11:27 AM, Rudy De Busscher <
> > > rdebussc...@gmail.com
> > > > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > I'm not saying we should move TomEE code into Geronimo.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If we move the generic stuff for JWT Auth to Geronimo, it will
> not
> > be
> > > > > > enough to have it completely functional. And that should be made
> > > clear
> > > > > from
> > > > > > the beginning for all potential usages.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 9 March 2018 at 12:20, John D. Ament 
> > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > I don't think its a good idea to move TomEE code into Geronimo.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 5:50 AM Romain Manni-Bucau <
> > > > > rmannibu...@gmail.com
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > If there is no other comment, any objection to move it to
> > > > > > > > geronimo-jwt-auth? (let say if not we do it on monday
> european
> > > > time)
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > > > > > > @rmannibucau  |  Blog
> > > > > > > >  | Old Blog
> > > > > > > >  | Github
> > > > > > > >  | LinkedIn
> > > > > > > >  | Book
> > > > > > > >  > > > > > > ee-8-high-performance>
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > 2018-03-06 11:11 GMT+01:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <
> > > > rmannibu...@gmail.com
> > > > > >:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> 2018-03-06 10:24 GMT+01:00 Jean-Louis Monteiro <
> > > > > > > jlmonte...@tomitribe.com>
> > > > > > > >> :
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >>> Hi community,
> > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > >>> So we now have something close in terms of MP-JWT
> > > implementation.
> > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > >>> With the playground branch I've been working on (Thanks
> > Romain
> > > > for
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > >>> help), we now pass 100% of the TCK (including a missing
> part
> > in
> > > > > > MP-JWT
> > > > > > > >>> TCK
> > > > > > > >>> I have eagerly added - see ticket on MP-JWT).
> > >

Re: MP-JWT progress

[Romain Manni-Bucau]

quick heads up: if no objection in between I plan to start creating the
project tomorrow to let JL importing the code he did.


Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau  |  Blog
 | Old Blog
 | Github  |
LinkedIn  | Book


2018-03-12 16:33 GMT+01:00 Rudy De Busscher :

> OK (non-binding of course :) for generic classes at Geronimo.
>
> On 12 March 2018 at 16:01, Jean-Louis Monteiro 
> wrote:
>
> > So what's the conclusion here?
> >
> > Should I request a git repo on geronimo and extract all generic classes
> > there along side with other implementations?
> > Or do you guys prefer another tomee repo with the MP-JWT impl?
> >
> > I don't mind if they go here and there, just need to know so I can move
> on
> > with the contribution.
> >
> > --
> > Jean-Louis Monteiro
> > http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
> > http://www.tomitribe.com
> >
> > On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 2:15 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> rmannibu...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > 2018-03-09 12:37 GMT+01:00 Jonathan Gallimore <
> > > jonathan.gallim...@gmail.com>
> > > :
> > >
> > > > Currently this in a PR, so it hasn't actually been merged anywhere.
> > > There's
> > > > some at least some TomEE specific code, so some modules need defining
> > > > before it can be "moved" in my view.
> > > >
> > > > Rudy's point is good one - no doubt a generic, reusable module may
> well
> > > be
> > > > what we end up with. Wherever that lives when it has clearly been
> > > defined,
> > > > it needs documenting and showing how to use it.
> > > >
> > > > We talked previously about being able to have modules in separate
> repos
> > > > under TomEE. Is there some issue with doing that? What's the rush to
> > > shift
> > > > this off to Geronimo?
> > > >
> > >
> > > No rush, geronimo will have a jwt-auth impl and I was waiting JL push
> > what
> > > he did before speaking of creating a project @G. I would like to share
> > the
> > > same impl with tomee to avoid to x2 the effort. however if not desired
> it
> > > is fine as well.
> > >
> > > It is also important to keep in mind that on tomee side there is *no*
> > > specific code, only fixes in the propagation which also impact
> > webprofile,
> > > nothing linked to MP or this particular spec.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Jon
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 11:27 AM, Rudy De Busscher <
> > rdebussc...@gmail.com
> > > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I'm not saying we should move TomEE code into Geronimo.
> > > > >
> > > > > If we move the generic stuff for JWT Auth to Geronimo, it will not
> be
> > > > > enough to have it completely functional. And that should be made
> > clear
> > > > from
> > > > > the beginning for all potential usages.
> > > > >
> > > > > On 9 March 2018 at 12:20, John D. Ament 
> > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > I don't think its a good idea to move TomEE code into Geronimo.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 5:50 AM Romain Manni-Bucau <
> > > > rmannibu...@gmail.com
> > > > > >
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > If there is no other comment, any objection to move it to
> > > > > > > geronimo-jwt-auth? (let say if not we do it on monday european
> > > time)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > > > > > @rmannibucau  |  Blog
> > > > > > >  | Old Blog
> > > > > > >  | Github
> > > > > > >  | LinkedIn
> > > > > > >  | Book
> > > > > > >  > > > > > ee-8-high-performance>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > 2018-03-06 11:11 GMT+01:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <
> > > rmannibu...@gmail.com
> > > > >:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> 2018-03-06 10:24 GMT+01:00 Jean-Louis Monteiro <
> > > > > > jlmonte...@tomitribe.com>
> > > > > > >> :
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >>> Hi community,
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>> So we now have something close in terms of MP-JWT
> > implementation.
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>> With the playground branch I've been working on (Thanks
> Romain
> > > for
> > > > > the
> > > > > > >>> help), we now pass 100% of the TCK (including a missing part
> in
> > > > > MP-JWT
> > > > > > >>> TCK
> > > > > > >>> I have eagerly added - see ticket on MP-JWT).
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>> Now the question is how do we proceed?
> > > > > > >>> Knowing that most of the code is not TomEE specific.
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> I'd move it to G to a new git repo keeping only the tck exec
> - a
> > > bit
> > > > > > like
> > > > > > >> Roberto started with config. I'll be happy to help fixing the
> > > small
> > > > > > >> remaining en

Re: MP-JWT progress

[John D. Ament]

I don't think its a good idea to move TomEE code into Geronimo.

On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 5:50 AM Romain Manni-Bucau 
wrote:

> If there is no other comment, any objection to move it to
> geronimo-jwt-auth? (let say if not we do it on monday european time)
>
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>  | Old Blog
>  | Github
>  | LinkedIn
>  | Book
> 
>
> 2018-03-06 11:11 GMT+01:00 Romain Manni-Bucau :
>
>>
>> 2018-03-06 10:24 GMT+01:00 Jean-Louis Monteiro 
>> :
>>
>>> Hi community,
>>>
>>>
>>> So we now have something close in terms of MP-JWT implementation.
>>>
>>> With the playground branch I've been working on (Thanks Romain for the
>>> help), we now pass 100% of the TCK (including a missing part in MP-JWT
>>> TCK
>>> I have eagerly added - see ticket on MP-JWT).
>>>
>>> Now the question is how do we proceed?
>>> Knowing that most of the code is not TomEE specific.
>>>
>>
>> I'd move it to G to a new git repo keeping only the tck exec - a bit like
>> Roberto started with config. I'll be happy to help fixing the small
>> remaining enhancements to do (jwt parsing based on jsonb/p, config etc).
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Only few things are in the TomcatSecurityService but that can remain in
>>> TomEE because it's not really MP-JWT specific either.
>>>
>>
>> +1, was overdue anyway for our servlet-ejb integration
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Here is the PR for discussion
>>> https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/123
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>> Jean-Louis
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Jean-Louis Monteiro
>>> http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
>>> http://www.tomitribe.com
>>>
>>
>>
>

Re: MP-JWT progress

[Romain Manni-Bucau]

If there is no other comment, any objection to move it to
geronimo-jwt-auth? (let say if not we do it on monday european time)


Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau  |  Blog
 | Old Blog
 | Github  |
LinkedIn  | Book


2018-03-06 11:11 GMT+01:00 Romain Manni-Bucau :

>
> 2018-03-06 10:24 GMT+01:00 Jean-Louis Monteiro :
>
>> Hi community,
>>
>>
>> So we now have something close in terms of MP-JWT implementation.
>>
>> With the playground branch I've been working on (Thanks Romain for the
>> help), we now pass 100% of the TCK (including a missing part in MP-JWT TCK
>> I have eagerly added - see ticket on MP-JWT).
>>
>> Now the question is how do we proceed?
>> Knowing that most of the code is not TomEE specific.
>>
>
> I'd move it to G to a new git repo keeping only the tck exec - a bit like
> Roberto started with config. I'll be happy to help fixing the small
> remaining enhancements to do (jwt parsing based on jsonb/p, config etc).
>
>
>>
>> Only few things are in the TomcatSecurityService but that can remain in
>> TomEE because it's not really MP-JWT specific either.
>>
>
> +1, was overdue anyway for our servlet-ejb integration
>
>
>>
>> Here is the PR for discussion
>> https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/123
>>
>> Cheers
>> Jean-Louis
>>
>>
>> --
>> Jean-Louis Monteiro
>> http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
>> http://www.tomitribe.com
>>
>
>

Re: MP-JWT progress

[Romain Manni-Bucau]

2018-03-06 10:24 GMT+01:00 Jean-Louis Monteiro :

> Hi community,
>
>
> So we now have something close in terms of MP-JWT implementation.
>
> With the playground branch I've been working on (Thanks Romain for the
> help), we now pass 100% of the TCK (including a missing part in MP-JWT TCK
> I have eagerly added - see ticket on MP-JWT).
>
> Now the question is how do we proceed?
> Knowing that most of the code is not TomEE specific.
>

I'd move it to G to a new git repo keeping only the tck exec - a bit like
Roberto started with config. I'll be happy to help fixing the small
remaining enhancements to do (jwt parsing based on jsonb/p, config etc).


>
> Only few things are in the TomcatSecurityService but that can remain in
> TomEE because it's not really MP-JWT specific either.
>

+1, was overdue anyway for our servlet-ejb integration


>
> Here is the PR for discussion
> https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/123
>
> Cheers
> Jean-Louis
>
>
> --
> Jean-Louis Monteiro
> http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
> http://www.tomitribe.com
>

MP-JWT progress

[Jean-Louis Monteiro]

Hi community,


So we now have something close in terms of MP-JWT implementation.

With the playground branch I've been working on (Thanks Romain for the
help), we now pass 100% of the TCK (including a missing part in MP-JWT TCK
I have eagerly added - see ticket on MP-JWT).

Now the question is how do we proceed?
Knowing that most of the code is not TomEE specific.

Only few things are in the TomcatSecurityService but that can remain in
TomEE because it's not really MP-JWT specific either.

Here is the PR for discussion
https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/123

Cheers
Jean-Louis


--
Jean-Louis Monteiro
http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
http://www.tomitribe.com