You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to stonehenge-dev@incubator.apache.org by Ben Dewey <Be...@26ny.com> on 2009/09/22 19:58:21 UTC
Archival of certificate based StockTrader
So, I've discussed this with a few people on and off the list, but I'd like to start a public discussion on the topic.
We are moving quickly into a Claims Based StockTrader for our M2 release. There have been significant improvements since M1 and it would be a shame to lose those. Basically the question is:
How do we archive the certificate based StockTrader before moving on to a full Claims Based StockTrader?
Due to timing I don't think its feasible to have another relase, so we basically looking at either.
1) Tagging a release as M1.1 complete with config and Metro
2) Branching the StockTrader code for Certificate and Claims Based
Thoughts anyone? Mentors?
-Ben Dewey
RE: Archival of certificate based StockTrader
Posted by Ben Dewey <Be...@26ny.com>.
I don’t want to draw this issue out too much, so I'm going to move forward with the tagging approach (based on other comments) and we'll start implementing your CBS patches directly into the trunk for testing.
-Ben Dewey
-----Original Message-----
From: Ming Jin [mailto:skyairmj@gmail.com]
Sent: Sunday, September 27, 2009 5:15 PM
To: stonehenge-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Archival of certificate based StockTrader
Hi there,
I have a different idea towards this question. Please correct me if I got
wrong. Thanks.
Certificate based StockTrader of M1 means the message level security between
BSL and OPS, while the Claims Based StockTrader of M2 focuses on the
security between Trader_client and BSL, such as authentication &
authorization.
So far, as the OPS wsdl is not changed, so introducing CBS won't affect the
communication between BSL and OPS. That means, they can be kept in one
place, right?
Do I miss something? Can someone tell me why we need to separate these two?
-- Ming Jin
On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 8:58 PM, Ben Dewey <Be...@26ny.com> wrote:
> So, I've discussed this with a few people on and off the list, but I'd
> like to start a public discussion on the topic.
>
> We are moving quickly into a Claims Based StockTrader for our M2 release.
> There have been significant improvements since M1 and it would be a shame
> to lose those. Basically the question is:
>
> How do we archive the certificate based StockTrader before moving on to a
> full Claims Based StockTrader?
>
> Due to timing I don't think its feasible to have another relase, so we
> basically looking at either.
>
> 1) Tagging a release as M1.1 complete with config and Metro
> 2) Branching the StockTrader code for Certificate and Claims Based
>
> Thoughts anyone? Mentors?
>
> -Ben Dewey
>
>
--
Ming Jin
Consultant
Thoughtworks, Incj <http://blogjava.net/mingj>
Twitter: https://twitter.com/mingjin
Re: Archival of certificate based StockTrader
Posted by Ming Jin <sk...@gmail.com>.
Hi there,
I have a different idea towards this question. Please correct me if I got
wrong. Thanks.
Certificate based StockTrader of M1 means the message level security between
BSL and OPS, while the Claims Based StockTrader of M2 focuses on the
security between Trader_client and BSL, such as authentication &
authorization.
So far, as the OPS wsdl is not changed, so introducing CBS won't affect the
communication between BSL and OPS. That means, they can be kept in one
place, right?
Do I miss something? Can someone tell me why we need to separate these two?
-- Ming Jin
On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 8:58 PM, Ben Dewey <Be...@26ny.com> wrote:
> So, I've discussed this with a few people on and off the list, but I'd
> like to start a public discussion on the topic.
>
> We are moving quickly into a Claims Based StockTrader for our M2 release.
> There have been significant improvements since M1 and it would be a shame
> to lose those. Basically the question is:
>
> How do we archive the certificate based StockTrader before moving on to a
> full Claims Based StockTrader?
>
> Due to timing I don't think its feasible to have another relase, so we
> basically looking at either.
>
> 1) Tagging a release as M1.1 complete with config and Metro
> 2) Branching the StockTrader code for Certificate and Claims Based
>
> Thoughts anyone? Mentors?
>
> -Ben Dewey
>
>
--
Ming Jin
Consultant
Thoughtworks, Incj <http://blogjava.net/mingj>
Twitter: https://twitter.com/mingjin
Re: Archival of certificate based StockTrader
Posted by Uthaiyashankar <sh...@apache.org>.
Hi Ben,
+1 for taggging the code as M1.1
Regards,
Shankar
On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 1:28 AM, Ben Dewey <Be...@26ny.com> wrote:
> So, I've discussed this with a few people on and off the list, but I'd like to start a public discussion on the topic.
>
> We are moving quickly into a Claims Based StockTrader for our M2 release. There have been significant improvements since M1 and it would be a shame to lose those. Basically the question is:
>
> How do we archive the certificate based StockTrader before moving on to a full Claims Based StockTrader?
>
> Due to timing I don't think its feasible to have another relase, so we basically looking at either.
>
> 1) Tagging a release as M1.1 complete with config and Metro
> 2) Branching the StockTrader code for Certificate and Claims Based
>
> Thoughts anyone? Mentors?
>
> -Ben Dewey
>
>
--
S.Uthaiyashankar
Software Architect
WSO2 Inc.
http://wso2.com/ - "The Open Source SOA Company"
Re: Archival of certificate based StockTrader
Posted by Chintana Wilamuna <ch...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 1:28 AM, Ben Dewey <Be...@26ny.com> wrote:
> Due to timing I don't think its feasible to have another relase, so we basically looking at either.
>
> 1) Tagging a release as M1.1 complete with config and Metro
> 2) Branching the StockTrader code for Certificate and Claims Based
If Apache allows having a tag which does not have a corresponding
release then +1.
Else, we could go with a branch I guess.
Bye,
-Chintana
--
http://engwar.com/