You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@shiro.apache.org by Kalle Korhonen <ka...@gmail.com> on 2010/02/02 14:04:46 UTC
Combine aspectj and standalone samples?
Wanted to close out SHIRO-129 (aspectj integration) so I just
mavenized and committed the contributed sample (not attached to the
reactor build yet). We also have a rudimentary standalone sample which
actually isn't much of an app but just main that behaves like a unit
test. The aspectj sample doesn't have main() at the moment but the
sample domain is decent and complete enough so we could easily create
a simple standalone app around it. I'm thinking that we should just
drop the current standalone, rename the aspectj as the standalone
sample and make it a runnable desktop app. What say you?
Kalle
Re: Combine aspectj and standalone samples?
Posted by Les Hazlewood <lh...@apache.org>.
No worries - I'll commit now.
Thanks,
Les
On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 3:29 PM, Kalle Korhonen
<ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> No I haven't, go ahead. I created an issue for combining the two
> samples as proposed and scheduled it tentatively for 1.0.1. Thanks -
> should have added the ASF headers myself.
>
> Kalle
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 12:07 PM, Les Hazlewood <lh...@apache.org> wrote:
>> Kalle, have you started to move this stuff?
>>
>> I was just about to commit changes to most of those files by adding in
>> the ASF header, but I thought I'd check first to avoid merge
>> conflicts.
>>
>> - Les
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 10:53 AM, Les Hazlewood <lh...@apache.org> wrote:
>>> I agree - the Quickstart main is good enough as a unit-test-like
>>> example to demonstrate the API. Beyond that, a proper standalone
>>> example application should probably demonstrate a nicer feature set
>>> (like aspectj integration). Good idea :)
>>>
>>> On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 8:04 AM, Kalle Korhonen
>>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Wanted to close out SHIRO-129 (aspectj integration) so I just
>>>> mavenized and committed the contributed sample (not attached to the
>>>> reactor build yet). We also have a rudimentary standalone sample which
>>>> actually isn't much of an app but just main that behaves like a unit
>>>> test. The aspectj sample doesn't have main() at the moment but the
>>>> sample domain is decent and complete enough so we could easily create
>>>> a simple standalone app around it. I'm thinking that we should just
>>>> drop the current standalone, rename the aspectj as the standalone
>>>> sample and make it a runnable desktop app. What say you?
>>>>
>>>> Kalle
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
Re: Combine aspectj and standalone samples?
Posted by Kalle Korhonen <ka...@gmail.com>.
No I haven't, go ahead. I created an issue for combining the two
samples as proposed and scheduled it tentatively for 1.0.1. Thanks -
should have added the ASF headers myself.
Kalle
On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 12:07 PM, Les Hazlewood <lh...@apache.org> wrote:
> Kalle, have you started to move this stuff?
>
> I was just about to commit changes to most of those files by adding in
> the ASF header, but I thought I'd check first to avoid merge
> conflicts.
>
> - Les
>
> On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 10:53 AM, Les Hazlewood <lh...@apache.org> wrote:
>> I agree - the Quickstart main is good enough as a unit-test-like
>> example to demonstrate the API. Beyond that, a proper standalone
>> example application should probably demonstrate a nicer feature set
>> (like aspectj integration). Good idea :)
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 8:04 AM, Kalle Korhonen
>> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Wanted to close out SHIRO-129 (aspectj integration) so I just
>>> mavenized and committed the contributed sample (not attached to the
>>> reactor build yet). We also have a rudimentary standalone sample which
>>> actually isn't much of an app but just main that behaves like a unit
>>> test. The aspectj sample doesn't have main() at the moment but the
>>> sample domain is decent and complete enough so we could easily create
>>> a simple standalone app around it. I'm thinking that we should just
>>> drop the current standalone, rename the aspectj as the standalone
>>> sample and make it a runnable desktop app. What say you?
>>>
>>> Kalle
>>>
>>
>
Re: Combine aspectj and standalone samples?
Posted by Les Hazlewood <lh...@apache.org>.
Kalle, have you started to move this stuff?
I was just about to commit changes to most of those files by adding in
the ASF header, but I thought I'd check first to avoid merge
conflicts.
- Les
On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 10:53 AM, Les Hazlewood <lh...@apache.org> wrote:
> I agree - the Quickstart main is good enough as a unit-test-like
> example to demonstrate the API. Beyond that, a proper standalone
> example application should probably demonstrate a nicer feature set
> (like aspectj integration). Good idea :)
>
> On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 8:04 AM, Kalle Korhonen
> <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Wanted to close out SHIRO-129 (aspectj integration) so I just
>> mavenized and committed the contributed sample (not attached to the
>> reactor build yet). We also have a rudimentary standalone sample which
>> actually isn't much of an app but just main that behaves like a unit
>> test. The aspectj sample doesn't have main() at the moment but the
>> sample domain is decent and complete enough so we could easily create
>> a simple standalone app around it. I'm thinking that we should just
>> drop the current standalone, rename the aspectj as the standalone
>> sample and make it a runnable desktop app. What say you?
>>
>> Kalle
>>
>
Re: Combine aspectj and standalone samples?
Posted by Les Hazlewood <lh...@apache.org>.
I agree - the Quickstart main is good enough as a unit-test-like
example to demonstrate the API. Beyond that, a proper standalone
example application should probably demonstrate a nicer feature set
(like aspectj integration). Good idea :)
On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 8:04 AM, Kalle Korhonen
<ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Wanted to close out SHIRO-129 (aspectj integration) so I just
> mavenized and committed the contributed sample (not attached to the
> reactor build yet). We also have a rudimentary standalone sample which
> actually isn't much of an app but just main that behaves like a unit
> test. The aspectj sample doesn't have main() at the moment but the
> sample domain is decent and complete enough so we could easily create
> a simple standalone app around it. I'm thinking that we should just
> drop the current standalone, rename the aspectj as the standalone
> sample and make it a runnable desktop app. What say you?
>
> Kalle
>