On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 3:11 AM, Brian Eaton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I just checked in a couple of classes that provide real security > tokens, configured per-container. They are, for the moment, dead > code. I don't want to remove the default usage of > BasicSecurityTokenDecoder, because easy testing is too useful. > > Any thoughts on how Shindig java deployments should opt-in to using > these classes? Hand-written Guice modules? Configuration in > containers.js? > container configuration is the way to go. It's actually pretty easy: - bind all possible variants with symbolic names (the class names are as good as any) - decoder code dispatches to appropriate variant based on container name. Making people write Guice modules is a non-starter. Shindig should be able to be used without writing any code.
