I would just add a boolean in AbstractOperation whether to include the Lifetime or not, defaulting to true. What errors are you trying to see when the unit tests are run?
Colm. On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 5:23 PM, NicholaiX <[email protected]> wrote: > I looked at the code, and it's potentially an easy change I can make. There > are two options: > > 1. Use a condition which will result in Lifetime being skipped. For > example, > if both the Created and the Expires are set to Instant.EPOCH, don't create > Lifetime. Would there ever be a reason where someone would want both > Created > and Expires set to epoch? > > 2. Use a more flexible configuration which will allow control over the > fields via a property bag. (e.g. something like > sts.filter.issueresponse.lifetime=true or a better version of that). > However > this option I'm unclear, since I don't have a good understanding of the > entire framework and what I can reuse and what I need to write from > scratch. > Any property bags already in place that would be available in the > *Operation > implementation(s)? > > I have not yet been able to fully build and test CXF 3.2 (unit tests fail), > and I am not adventurous enough to make substantial changes without being > able to run the unit tests. > > > > > > -- > View this message in context: http://cxf.547215.n5.nabble. > com/STS-removing-Lifetime-from-response-tp5782461p5782632.html > Sent from the cxf-user mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > -- Colm O hEigeartaigh Talend Community Coder http://coders.talend.com
