On Wed, Mar 19, 2008 at 9:03 AM, Ivan Dubrov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > What's the reason to make it NOT depend on Spring? tapestry-acegi does NOT > uses Spring IoC container, it uses T5 IoC for configuring the services, but > it does use some Spring utility classes, which is in my opinion just fine > (it certainly increases size of the final archive, but who bothers about > this? :).
Yes, is it a problem depending on spring when the package completely hides spring from the user? I think it's not possible to use Acegi without spring as certain feature goes back to using spring interfaces. > The bad thing about tapestry-acegi is that it is not very flexible, though. > Recently I was trying to apply tapestry-acegi for CAS authentication > (http://www.ja-sig.org/products/cas/) and found that I had to rewrite almost > every line of its module class, which unfortunately indicates that > tapestry-acegi is not very reusable. On the other hand, tapestry-acegi does > have an added value above the core Acegi (for example, worker that allows > applying the @Secured to the methods/pages), so I can't just throw it away > and write my own module file — that's not enough, I need these helper > classes. You did a good job with the first code, so I'm happy to accept further changes to make it more flexible :) -- regards, Robin --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
