[GitHub] [solr] gerlowskija commented on pull request #897: SOLR-15738: Convert v2 security APIs to annotations

[GitBox <gi...@apache.org>]

gerlowskija commented on PR #897:
URL: https://github.com/apache/solr/pull/897#issuecomment-1151391577

   > Do we really need separate classes for specifying the `EndPoint` ? can we just make them internal to `SeciurityConfHandler` ?
   
   The API classes can be internal if there's consensus for that, but my personal vote would be that they stay separate.
   
   1. The current mapping of APIs -> RequestHandlers is based entirely on the v1 API without any consideration of v2.  There's no reason in a v2 world for the `GET /cluster/aliases` API to live in CollectionsHandler.java.
   2. Many of our RequestHandler's are absolute monsters.  The more code we can keep out of those files, the better IMO.  Particularly since one of my ultimate goals is to see the "meat" of our APIs move from SomeRequestHandler.handleRequestBody to these individual API classes. 
    
   > We should have concrete POJOs that describe the payloads ?
   
   We do, yep.  You didn't see any at the time of your previous comment because I had only pushed up 2 of the `GET` APIs at that point (which of course don't have payloads).  I've updated the PR to cover all of the security APIs, so you should see payload POJOs now if you take another look (e.g. `JWTConfigurationPayload`,  `UpdateRuleBasedAuthPermissionPayload`, etc.)


-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscribe@solr.apache.org

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscribe@solr.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: issues-help@solr.apache.org