MP-JWT progress

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
46 messages Options
123
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

MP-JWT progress

Jean-Louis MONTEIRO
Hi community,


So we now have something close in terms of MP-JWT implementation.

With the playground branch I've been working on (Thanks Romain for the
help), we now pass 100% of the TCK (including a missing part in MP-JWT TCK
I have eagerly added - see ticket on MP-JWT).

Now the question is how do we proceed?
Knowing that most of the code is not TomEE specific.

Only few things are in the TomcatSecurityService but that can remain in
TomEE because it's not really MP-JWT specific either.

Here is the PR for discussion
https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/123

Cheers
Jean-Louis


--
Jean-Louis Monteiro
http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
http://www.tomitribe.com
   --
    Jean-Louis Monteiro
    http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
    http://www.tomitribe.com
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: MP-JWT progress

Romain Manni-Bucau
2018-03-06 10:24 GMT+01:00 Jean-Louis Monteiro <[hidden email]>:

> Hi community,
>
>
> So we now have something close in terms of MP-JWT implementation.
>
> With the playground branch I've been working on (Thanks Romain for the
> help), we now pass 100% of the TCK (including a missing part in MP-JWT TCK
> I have eagerly added - see ticket on MP-JWT).
>
> Now the question is how do we proceed?
> Knowing that most of the code is not TomEE specific.
>

I'd move it to G to a new git repo keeping only the tck exec - a bit like
Roberto started with config. I'll be happy to help fixing the small
remaining enhancements to do (jwt parsing based on jsonb/p, config etc).


>
> Only few things are in the TomcatSecurityService but that can remain in
> TomEE because it's not really MP-JWT specific either.
>

+1, was overdue anyway for our servlet-ejb integration


>
> Here is the PR for discussion
> https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/123
>
> Cheers
> Jean-Louis
>
>
> --
> Jean-Louis Monteiro
> http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
> http://www.tomitribe.com
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: MP-JWT progress

Romain Manni-Bucau
If there is no other comment, any objection to move it to
geronimo-jwt-auth? (let say if not we do it on monday european time)


Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
<https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
<http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
<https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance>

2018-03-06 11:11 GMT+01:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <[hidden email]>:

>
> 2018-03-06 10:24 GMT+01:00 Jean-Louis Monteiro <[hidden email]>:
>
>> Hi community,
>>
>>
>> So we now have something close in terms of MP-JWT implementation.
>>
>> With the playground branch I've been working on (Thanks Romain for the
>> help), we now pass 100% of the TCK (including a missing part in MP-JWT TCK
>> I have eagerly added - see ticket on MP-JWT).
>>
>> Now the question is how do we proceed?
>> Knowing that most of the code is not TomEE specific.
>>
>
> I'd move it to G to a new git repo keeping only the tck exec - a bit like
> Roberto started with config. I'll be happy to help fixing the small
> remaining enhancements to do (jwt parsing based on jsonb/p, config etc).
>
>
>>
>> Only few things are in the TomcatSecurityService but that can remain in
>> TomEE because it's not really MP-JWT specific either.
>>
>
> +1, was overdue anyway for our servlet-ejb integration
>
>
>>
>> Here is the PR for discussion
>> https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/123
>>
>> Cheers
>> Jean-Louis
>>
>>
>> --
>> Jean-Louis Monteiro
>> http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
>> http://www.tomitribe.com
>>
>
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: MP-JWT progress

Rudy De Busscher
No objection but an important remark to make.

it will not be enough to just add this  geronimo-jwt-auth artifact to a
server to have it functional. There will be some server-side integration
code required (just as we will need for TomEE)

This is thus clearly different from other microprofile implementations like
geronimo-config.

Just want to mention this as there are already people (outside of this
community) thinking that such a thing is possible (or should be possible)

Rudy

On 9 March 2018 at 11:49, Romain Manni-Bucau <[hidden email]> wrote:

> If there is no other comment, any objection to move it to
> geronimo-jwt-auth? (let say if not we do it on monday european time)
>
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
> <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <https://github.com/
> rmannibucau> |
> LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
> <https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-
> ee-8-high-performance>
>
> 2018-03-06 11:11 GMT+01:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <[hidden email]>:
>
> >
> > 2018-03-06 10:24 GMT+01:00 Jean-Louis Monteiro <[hidden email]
> >:
> >
> >> Hi community,
> >>
> >>
> >> So we now have something close in terms of MP-JWT implementation.
> >>
> >> With the playground branch I've been working on (Thanks Romain for the
> >> help), we now pass 100% of the TCK (including a missing part in MP-JWT
> TCK
> >> I have eagerly added - see ticket on MP-JWT).
> >>
> >> Now the question is how do we proceed?
> >> Knowing that most of the code is not TomEE specific.
> >>
> >
> > I'd move it to G to a new git repo keeping only the tck exec - a bit like
> > Roberto started with config. I'll be happy to help fixing the small
> > remaining enhancements to do (jwt parsing based on jsonb/p, config etc).
> >
> >
> >>
> >> Only few things are in the TomcatSecurityService but that can remain in
> >> TomEE because it's not really MP-JWT specific either.
> >>
> >
> > +1, was overdue anyway for our servlet-ejb integration
> >
> >
> >>
> >> Here is the PR for discussion
> >> https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/123
> >>
> >> Cheers
> >> Jean-Louis
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Jean-Louis Monteiro
> >> http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
> >> http://www.tomitribe.com
> >>
> >
> >
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: MP-JWT progress

Romain Manni-Bucau
2018-03-09 12:02 GMT+01:00 Rudy De Busscher <[hidden email]>:

> No objection but an important remark to make.
>
> it will not be enough to just add this  geronimo-jwt-auth artifact to a
> server to have it functional. There will be some server-side integration
> code required (just as we will need for TomEE)
>

it is not the case for tomee and shouldn't normally if the server
propagates properly its security context. It is not always the case, you
are right,
but for asf servers it should AFAIK, no?


>
> This is thus clearly different from other microprofile implementations like
> geronimo-config.
>
> Just want to mention this as there are already people (outside of this
> community) thinking that such a thing is possible (or should be possible)
>
> Rudy
>
> On 9 March 2018 at 11:49, Romain Manni-Bucau <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> > If there is no other comment, any objection to move it to
> > geronimo-jwt-auth? (let say if not we do it on monday european time)
> >
> >
> > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
> > <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
> > <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <https://github.com/
> > rmannibucau> |
> > LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
> > <https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-
> > ee-8-high-performance>
> >
> > 2018-03-06 11:11 GMT+01:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <[hidden email]>:
> >
> > >
> > > 2018-03-06 10:24 GMT+01:00 Jean-Louis Monteiro <
> [hidden email]
> > >:
> > >
> > >> Hi community,
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> So we now have something close in terms of MP-JWT implementation.
> > >>
> > >> With the playground branch I've been working on (Thanks Romain for the
> > >> help), we now pass 100% of the TCK (including a missing part in MP-JWT
> > TCK
> > >> I have eagerly added - see ticket on MP-JWT).
> > >>
> > >> Now the question is how do we proceed?
> > >> Knowing that most of the code is not TomEE specific.
> > >>
> > >
> > > I'd move it to G to a new git repo keeping only the tck exec - a bit
> like
> > > Roberto started with config. I'll be happy to help fixing the small
> > > remaining enhancements to do (jwt parsing based on jsonb/p, config
> etc).
> > >
> > >
> > >>
> > >> Only few things are in the TomcatSecurityService but that can remain
> in
> > >> TomEE because it's not really MP-JWT specific either.
> > >>
> > >
> > > +1, was overdue anyway for our servlet-ejb integration
> > >
> > >
> > >>
> > >> Here is the PR for discussion
> > >> https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/123
> > >>
> > >> Cheers
> > >> Jean-Louis
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> --
> > >> Jean-Louis Monteiro
> > >> http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
> > >> http://www.tomitribe.com
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> >
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: MP-JWT progress

Rudy De Busscher
for example
JAX-RS application class annotated with @LoginConfig. > only urls defined
in the @ApplicationPath should use the JWT Auth method.

Other endpoints, like servlet should use the 'default' method defined in
the web.xml.

AFAIK, there exist no integration point possible to do this, not even
JASPIC. So it needs to be solved by the 'internals' of the Application
server.



On 9 March 2018 at 12:04, Romain Manni-Bucau <[hidden email]> wrote:

> 2018-03-09 12:02 GMT+01:00 Rudy De Busscher <[hidden email]>:
>
> > No objection but an important remark to make.
> >
> > it will not be enough to just add this  geronimo-jwt-auth artifact to a
> > server to have it functional. There will be some server-side integration
> > code required (just as we will need for TomEE)
> >
>
> it is not the case for tomee and shouldn't normally if the server
> propagates properly its security context. It is not always the case, you
> are right,
> but for asf servers it should AFAIK, no?
>
>
> >
> > This is thus clearly different from other microprofile implementations
> like
> > geronimo-config.
> >
> > Just want to mention this as there are already people (outside of this
> > community) thinking that such a thing is possible (or should be possible)
> >
> > Rudy
> >
> > On 9 March 2018 at 11:49, Romain Manni-Bucau <[hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > If there is no other comment, any objection to move it to
> > > geronimo-jwt-auth? (let say if not we do it on monday european time)
> > >
> > >
> > > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
> > > <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
> > > <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <https://github.com/
> > > rmannibucau> |
> > > LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
> > > <https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-
> > > ee-8-high-performance>
> > >
> > > 2018-03-06 11:11 GMT+01:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <[hidden email]>:
> > >
> > > >
> > > > 2018-03-06 10:24 GMT+01:00 Jean-Louis Monteiro <
> > [hidden email]
> > > >:
> > > >
> > > >> Hi community,
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> So we now have something close in terms of MP-JWT implementation.
> > > >>
> > > >> With the playground branch I've been working on (Thanks Romain for
> the
> > > >> help), we now pass 100% of the TCK (including a missing part in
> MP-JWT
> > > TCK
> > > >> I have eagerly added - see ticket on MP-JWT).
> > > >>
> > > >> Now the question is how do we proceed?
> > > >> Knowing that most of the code is not TomEE specific.
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > > I'd move it to G to a new git repo keeping only the tck exec - a bit
> > like
> > > > Roberto started with config. I'll be happy to help fixing the small
> > > > remaining enhancements to do (jwt parsing based on jsonb/p, config
> > etc).
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >>
> > > >> Only few things are in the TomcatSecurityService but that can remain
> > in
> > > >> TomEE because it's not really MP-JWT specific either.
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > > +1, was overdue anyway for our servlet-ejb integration
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >>
> > > >> Here is the PR for discussion
> > > >> https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/123
> > > >>
> > > >> Cheers
> > > >> Jean-Louis
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> --
> > > >> Jean-Louis Monteiro
> > > >> http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
> > > >> http://www.tomitribe.com
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: MP-JWT progress

John D. Ament-2
In reply to this post by Romain Manni-Bucau
I don't think its a good idea to move TomEE code into Geronimo.

On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 5:50 AM Romain Manni-Bucau <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> If there is no other comment, any objection to move it to
> geronimo-jwt-auth? (let say if not we do it on monday european time)
>
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
> <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github
> <https://github.com/rmannibucau> | LinkedIn
> <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
> <https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance>
>
> 2018-03-06 11:11 GMT+01:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <[hidden email]>:
>
>>
>> 2018-03-06 10:24 GMT+01:00 Jean-Louis Monteiro <[hidden email]>
>> :
>>
>>> Hi community,
>>>
>>>
>>> So we now have something close in terms of MP-JWT implementation.
>>>
>>> With the playground branch I've been working on (Thanks Romain for the
>>> help), we now pass 100% of the TCK (including a missing part in MP-JWT
>>> TCK
>>> I have eagerly added - see ticket on MP-JWT).
>>>
>>> Now the question is how do we proceed?
>>> Knowing that most of the code is not TomEE specific.
>>>
>>
>> I'd move it to G to a new git repo keeping only the tck exec - a bit like
>> Roberto started with config. I'll be happy to help fixing the small
>> remaining enhancements to do (jwt parsing based on jsonb/p, config etc).
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Only few things are in the TomcatSecurityService but that can remain in
>>> TomEE because it's not really MP-JWT specific either.
>>>
>>
>> +1, was overdue anyway for our servlet-ejb integration
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Here is the PR for discussion
>>> https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/123
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>> Jean-Louis
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Jean-Louis Monteiro
>>> http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
>>> http://www.tomitribe.com
>>>
>>
>>
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: MP-JWT progress

Rudy De Busscher
I'm not saying we should move TomEE code into Geronimo.

If we move the generic stuff for JWT Auth to Geronimo, it will not be
enough to have it completely functional. And that should be made clear from
the beginning for all potential usages.

On 9 March 2018 at 12:20, John D. Ament <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I don't think its a good idea to move TomEE code into Geronimo.
>
> On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 5:50 AM Romain Manni-Bucau <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> > If there is no other comment, any objection to move it to
> > geronimo-jwt-auth? (let say if not we do it on monday european time)
> >
> >
> > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
> > <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
> > <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github
> > <https://github.com/rmannibucau> | LinkedIn
> > <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
> > <https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-
> ee-8-high-performance>
> >
> > 2018-03-06 11:11 GMT+01:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <[hidden email]>:
> >
> >>
> >> 2018-03-06 10:24 GMT+01:00 Jean-Louis Monteiro <
> [hidden email]>
> >> :
> >>
> >>> Hi community,
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> So we now have something close in terms of MP-JWT implementation.
> >>>
> >>> With the playground branch I've been working on (Thanks Romain for the
> >>> help), we now pass 100% of the TCK (including a missing part in MP-JWT
> >>> TCK
> >>> I have eagerly added - see ticket on MP-JWT).
> >>>
> >>> Now the question is how do we proceed?
> >>> Knowing that most of the code is not TomEE specific.
> >>>
> >>
> >> I'd move it to G to a new git repo keeping only the tck exec - a bit
> like
> >> Roberto started with config. I'll be happy to help fixing the small
> >> remaining enhancements to do (jwt parsing based on jsonb/p, config etc).
> >>
> >>
> >>>
> >>> Only few things are in the TomcatSecurityService but that can remain in
> >>> TomEE because it's not really MP-JWT specific either.
> >>>
> >>
> >> +1, was overdue anyway for our servlet-ejb integration
> >>
> >>
> >>>
> >>> Here is the PR for discussion
> >>> https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/123
> >>>
> >>> Cheers
> >>> Jean-Louis
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Jean-Louis Monteiro
> >>> http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
> >>> http://www.tomitribe.com
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: MP-JWT progress

jgallimore
Currently this in a PR, so it hasn't actually been merged anywhere. There's
some at least some TomEE specific code, so some modules need defining
before it can be "moved" in my view.

Rudy's point is good one - no doubt a generic, reusable module may well be
what we end up with. Wherever that lives when it has clearly been defined,
it needs documenting and showing how to use it.

We talked previously about being able to have modules in separate repos
under TomEE. Is there some issue with doing that? What's the rush to shift
this off to Geronimo?

Jon

On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 11:27 AM, Rudy De Busscher <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> I'm not saying we should move TomEE code into Geronimo.
>
> If we move the generic stuff for JWT Auth to Geronimo, it will not be
> enough to have it completely functional. And that should be made clear from
> the beginning for all potential usages.
>
> On 9 March 2018 at 12:20, John D. Ament <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > I don't think its a good idea to move TomEE code into Geronimo.
> >
> > On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 5:50 AM Romain Manni-Bucau <[hidden email]
> >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > If there is no other comment, any objection to move it to
> > > geronimo-jwt-auth? (let say if not we do it on monday european time)
> > >
> > >
> > > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
> > > <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
> > > <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github
> > > <https://github.com/rmannibucau> | LinkedIn
> > > <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
> > > <https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-
> > ee-8-high-performance>
> > >
> > > 2018-03-06 11:11 GMT+01:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <[hidden email]>:
> > >
> > >>
> > >> 2018-03-06 10:24 GMT+01:00 Jean-Louis Monteiro <
> > [hidden email]>
> > >> :
> > >>
> > >>> Hi community,
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> So we now have something close in terms of MP-JWT implementation.
> > >>>
> > >>> With the playground branch I've been working on (Thanks Romain for
> the
> > >>> help), we now pass 100% of the TCK (including a missing part in
> MP-JWT
> > >>> TCK
> > >>> I have eagerly added - see ticket on MP-JWT).
> > >>>
> > >>> Now the question is how do we proceed?
> > >>> Knowing that most of the code is not TomEE specific.
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >> I'd move it to G to a new git repo keeping only the tck exec - a bit
> > like
> > >> Roberto started with config. I'll be happy to help fixing the small
> > >> remaining enhancements to do (jwt parsing based on jsonb/p, config
> etc).
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>
> > >>> Only few things are in the TomcatSecurityService but that can remain
> in
> > >>> TomEE because it's not really MP-JWT specific either.
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >> +1, was overdue anyway for our servlet-ejb integration
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>
> > >>> Here is the PR for discussion
> > >>> https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/123
> > >>>
> > >>> Cheers
> > >>> Jean-Louis
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> --
> > >>> Jean-Louis Monteiro
> > >>> http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
> > >>> http://www.tomitribe.com
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> >
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: MP-JWT progress

Romain Manni-Bucau
2018-03-09 12:37 GMT+01:00 Jonathan Gallimore <[hidden email]>
:

> Currently this in a PR, so it hasn't actually been merged anywhere. There's
> some at least some TomEE specific code, so some modules need defining
> before it can be "moved" in my view.
>
> Rudy's point is good one - no doubt a generic, reusable module may well be
> what we end up with. Wherever that lives when it has clearly been defined,
> it needs documenting and showing how to use it.
>
> We talked previously about being able to have modules in separate repos
> under TomEE. Is there some issue with doing that? What's the rush to shift
> this off to Geronimo?
>

No rush, geronimo will have a jwt-auth impl and I was waiting JL push what
he did before speaking of creating a project @G. I would like to share the
same impl with tomee to avoid to x2 the effort. however if not desired it
is fine as well.

It is also important to keep in mind that on tomee side there is *no*
specific code, only fixes in the propagation which also impact webprofile,
nothing linked to MP or this particular spec.



>
> Jon
>
> On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 11:27 AM, Rudy De Busscher <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> > I'm not saying we should move TomEE code into Geronimo.
> >
> > If we move the generic stuff for JWT Auth to Geronimo, it will not be
> > enough to have it completely functional. And that should be made clear
> from
> > the beginning for all potential usages.
> >
> > On 9 March 2018 at 12:20, John D. Ament <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > > I don't think its a good idea to move TomEE code into Geronimo.
> > >
> > > On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 5:50 AM Romain Manni-Bucau <
> [hidden email]
> > >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > If there is no other comment, any objection to move it to
> > > > geronimo-jwt-auth? (let say if not we do it on monday european time)
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > > @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
> > > > <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
> > > > <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github
> > > > <https://github.com/rmannibucau> | LinkedIn
> > > > <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
> > > > <https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-
> > > ee-8-high-performance>
> > > >
> > > > 2018-03-06 11:11 GMT+01:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <[hidden email]
> >:
> > > >
> > > >>
> > > >> 2018-03-06 10:24 GMT+01:00 Jean-Louis Monteiro <
> > > [hidden email]>
> > > >> :
> > > >>
> > > >>> Hi community,
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>> So we now have something close in terms of MP-JWT implementation.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> With the playground branch I've been working on (Thanks Romain for
> > the
> > > >>> help), we now pass 100% of the TCK (including a missing part in
> > MP-JWT
> > > >>> TCK
> > > >>> I have eagerly added - see ticket on MP-JWT).
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Now the question is how do we proceed?
> > > >>> Knowing that most of the code is not TomEE specific.
> > > >>>
> > > >>
> > > >> I'd move it to G to a new git repo keeping only the tck exec - a bit
> > > like
> > > >> Roberto started with config. I'll be happy to help fixing the small
> > > >> remaining enhancements to do (jwt parsing based on jsonb/p, config
> > etc).
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Only few things are in the TomcatSecurityService but that can
> remain
> > in
> > > >>> TomEE because it's not really MP-JWT specific either.
> > > >>>
> > > >>
> > > >> +1, was overdue anyway for our servlet-ejb integration
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Here is the PR for discussion
> > > >>> https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/123
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Cheers
> > > >>> Jean-Louis
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>> --
> > > >>> Jean-Louis Monteiro
> > > >>> http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
> > > >>> http://www.tomitribe.com
> > > >>>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: MP-JWT progress

Jean-Louis MONTEIRO
So what's the conclusion here?

Should I request a git repo on geronimo and extract all generic classes
there along side with other implementations?
Or do you guys prefer another tomee repo with the MP-JWT impl?

I don't mind if they go here and there, just need to know so I can move on
with the contribution.

--
Jean-Louis Monteiro
http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
http://www.tomitribe.com

On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 2:15 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> 2018-03-09 12:37 GMT+01:00 Jonathan Gallimore <
> [hidden email]>
> :
>
> > Currently this in a PR, so it hasn't actually been merged anywhere.
> There's
> > some at least some TomEE specific code, so some modules need defining
> > before it can be "moved" in my view.
> >
> > Rudy's point is good one - no doubt a generic, reusable module may well
> be
> > what we end up with. Wherever that lives when it has clearly been
> defined,
> > it needs documenting and showing how to use it.
> >
> > We talked previously about being able to have modules in separate repos
> > under TomEE. Is there some issue with doing that? What's the rush to
> shift
> > this off to Geronimo?
> >
>
> No rush, geronimo will have a jwt-auth impl and I was waiting JL push what
> he did before speaking of creating a project @G. I would like to share the
> same impl with tomee to avoid to x2 the effort. however if not desired it
> is fine as well.
>
> It is also important to keep in mind that on tomee side there is *no*
> specific code, only fixes in the propagation which also impact webprofile,
> nothing linked to MP or this particular spec.
>
>
>
> >
> > Jon
> >
> > On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 11:27 AM, Rudy De Busscher <[hidden email]
> >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I'm not saying we should move TomEE code into Geronimo.
> > >
> > > If we move the generic stuff for JWT Auth to Geronimo, it will not be
> > > enough to have it completely functional. And that should be made clear
> > from
> > > the beginning for all potential usages.
> > >
> > > On 9 March 2018 at 12:20, John D. Ament <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > I don't think its a good idea to move TomEE code into Geronimo.
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 5:50 AM Romain Manni-Bucau <
> > [hidden email]
> > > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > If there is no other comment, any objection to move it to
> > > > > geronimo-jwt-auth? (let say if not we do it on monday european
> time)
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > > > @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
> > > > > <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
> > > > > <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github
> > > > > <https://github.com/rmannibucau> | LinkedIn
> > > > > <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
> > > > > <https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-
> > > > ee-8-high-performance>
> > > > >
> > > > > 2018-03-06 11:11 GMT+01:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <
> [hidden email]
> > >:
> > > > >
> > > > >>
> > > > >> 2018-03-06 10:24 GMT+01:00 Jean-Louis Monteiro <
> > > > [hidden email]>
> > > > >> :
> > > > >>
> > > > >>> Hi community,
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> So we now have something close in terms of MP-JWT implementation.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> With the playground branch I've been working on (Thanks Romain
> for
> > > the
> > > > >>> help), we now pass 100% of the TCK (including a missing part in
> > > MP-JWT
> > > > >>> TCK
> > > > >>> I have eagerly added - see ticket on MP-JWT).
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Now the question is how do we proceed?
> > > > >>> Knowing that most of the code is not TomEE specific.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>
> > > > >> I'd move it to G to a new git repo keeping only the tck exec - a
> bit
> > > > like
> > > > >> Roberto started with config. I'll be happy to help fixing the
> small
> > > > >> remaining enhancements to do (jwt parsing based on jsonb/p, config
> > > etc).
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Only few things are in the TomcatSecurityService but that can
> > remain
> > > in
> > > > >>> TomEE because it's not really MP-JWT specific either.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>
> > > > >> +1, was overdue anyway for our servlet-ejb integration
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Here is the PR for discussion
> > > > >>> https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/123
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Cheers
> > > > >>> Jean-Louis
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> --
> > > > >>> Jean-Louis Monteiro
> > > > >>> http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
> > > > >>> http://www.tomitribe.com
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
   --
    Jean-Louis Monteiro
    http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
    http://www.tomitribe.com
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: MP-JWT progress

Romain Manni-Bucau
2018-03-12 16:01 GMT+01:00 Jean-Louis Monteiro <[hidden email]>:

> So what's the conclusion here?
>
> Should I request a git repo on geronimo and extract all generic classes
> there along side with other implementations?
>

+1 from me


> Or do you guys prefer another tomee repo with the MP-JWT impl?
>
> I don't mind if they go here and there, just need to know so I can move on
> with the contribution.
>

we already have 3 days passed so tempted to say maybe wait tonight and just
move forward if you don't have more feedback
in any case it wouldn't be too late to fork back at tomee later if desired
(but hopefully we'll not self-fork ;))


>
> --
> Jean-Louis Monteiro
> http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
> http://www.tomitribe.com
>
> On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 2:15 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> > 2018-03-09 12:37 GMT+01:00 Jonathan Gallimore <
> > [hidden email]>
> > :
> >
> > > Currently this in a PR, so it hasn't actually been merged anywhere.
> > There's
> > > some at least some TomEE specific code, so some modules need defining
> > > before it can be "moved" in my view.
> > >
> > > Rudy's point is good one - no doubt a generic, reusable module may well
> > be
> > > what we end up with. Wherever that lives when it has clearly been
> > defined,
> > > it needs documenting and showing how to use it.
> > >
> > > We talked previously about being able to have modules in separate repos
> > > under TomEE. Is there some issue with doing that? What's the rush to
> > shift
> > > this off to Geronimo?
> > >
> >
> > No rush, geronimo will have a jwt-auth impl and I was waiting JL push
> what
> > he did before speaking of creating a project @G. I would like to share
> the
> > same impl with tomee to avoid to x2 the effort. however if not desired it
> > is fine as well.
> >
> > It is also important to keep in mind that on tomee side there is *no*
> > specific code, only fixes in the propagation which also impact
> webprofile,
> > nothing linked to MP or this particular spec.
> >
> >
> >
> > >
> > > Jon
> > >
> > > On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 11:27 AM, Rudy De Busscher <
> [hidden email]
> > >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > I'm not saying we should move TomEE code into Geronimo.
> > > >
> > > > If we move the generic stuff for JWT Auth to Geronimo, it will not be
> > > > enough to have it completely functional. And that should be made
> clear
> > > from
> > > > the beginning for all potential usages.
> > > >
> > > > On 9 March 2018 at 12:20, John D. Ament <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I don't think its a good idea to move TomEE code into Geronimo.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 5:50 AM Romain Manni-Bucau <
> > > [hidden email]
> > > > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > If there is no other comment, any objection to move it to
> > > > > > geronimo-jwt-auth? (let say if not we do it on monday european
> > time)
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > > > > @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
> > > > > > <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
> > > > > > <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github
> > > > > > <https://github.com/rmannibucau> | LinkedIn
> > > > > > <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
> > > > > > <https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-
> > > > > ee-8-high-performance>
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 2018-03-06 11:11 GMT+01:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <
> > [hidden email]
> > > >:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> 2018-03-06 10:24 GMT+01:00 Jean-Louis Monteiro <
> > > > > [hidden email]>
> > > > > >> :
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>> Hi community,
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> So we now have something close in terms of MP-JWT
> implementation.
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> With the playground branch I've been working on (Thanks Romain
> > for
> > > > the
> > > > > >>> help), we now pass 100% of the TCK (including a missing part in
> > > > MP-JWT
> > > > > >>> TCK
> > > > > >>> I have eagerly added - see ticket on MP-JWT).
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> Now the question is how do we proceed?
> > > > > >>> Knowing that most of the code is not TomEE specific.
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> I'd move it to G to a new git repo keeping only the tck exec - a
> > bit
> > > > > like
> > > > > >> Roberto started with config. I'll be happy to help fixing the
> > small
> > > > > >> remaining enhancements to do (jwt parsing based on jsonb/p,
> config
> > > > etc).
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> Only few things are in the TomcatSecurityService but that can
> > > remain
> > > > in
> > > > > >>> TomEE because it's not really MP-JWT specific either.
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> +1, was overdue anyway for our servlet-ejb integration
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> Here is the PR for discussion
> > > > > >>> https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/123
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> Cheers
> > > > > >>> Jean-Louis
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> --
> > > > > >>> Jean-Louis Monteiro
> > > > > >>> http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
> > > > > >>> http://www.tomitribe.com
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: MP-JWT progress

Rudy De Busscher
In reply to this post by Jean-Louis MONTEIRO
OK (non-binding of course :) for generic classes at Geronimo.

On 12 March 2018 at 16:01, Jean-Louis Monteiro <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> So what's the conclusion here?
>
> Should I request a git repo on geronimo and extract all generic classes
> there along side with other implementations?
> Or do you guys prefer another tomee repo with the MP-JWT impl?
>
> I don't mind if they go here and there, just need to know so I can move on
> with the contribution.
>
> --
> Jean-Louis Monteiro
> http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
> http://www.tomitribe.com
>
> On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 2:15 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> > 2018-03-09 12:37 GMT+01:00 Jonathan Gallimore <
> > [hidden email]>
> > :
> >
> > > Currently this in a PR, so it hasn't actually been merged anywhere.
> > There's
> > > some at least some TomEE specific code, so some modules need defining
> > > before it can be "moved" in my view.
> > >
> > > Rudy's point is good one - no doubt a generic, reusable module may well
> > be
> > > what we end up with. Wherever that lives when it has clearly been
> > defined,
> > > it needs documenting and showing how to use it.
> > >
> > > We talked previously about being able to have modules in separate repos
> > > under TomEE. Is there some issue with doing that? What's the rush to
> > shift
> > > this off to Geronimo?
> > >
> >
> > No rush, geronimo will have a jwt-auth impl and I was waiting JL push
> what
> > he did before speaking of creating a project @G. I would like to share
> the
> > same impl with tomee to avoid to x2 the effort. however if not desired it
> > is fine as well.
> >
> > It is also important to keep in mind that on tomee side there is *no*
> > specific code, only fixes in the propagation which also impact
> webprofile,
> > nothing linked to MP or this particular spec.
> >
> >
> >
> > >
> > > Jon
> > >
> > > On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 11:27 AM, Rudy De Busscher <
> [hidden email]
> > >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > I'm not saying we should move TomEE code into Geronimo.
> > > >
> > > > If we move the generic stuff for JWT Auth to Geronimo, it will not be
> > > > enough to have it completely functional. And that should be made
> clear
> > > from
> > > > the beginning for all potential usages.
> > > >
> > > > On 9 March 2018 at 12:20, John D. Ament <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I don't think its a good idea to move TomEE code into Geronimo.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 5:50 AM Romain Manni-Bucau <
> > > [hidden email]
> > > > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > If there is no other comment, any objection to move it to
> > > > > > geronimo-jwt-auth? (let say if not we do it on monday european
> > time)
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > > > > @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
> > > > > > <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
> > > > > > <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github
> > > > > > <https://github.com/rmannibucau> | LinkedIn
> > > > > > <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
> > > > > > <https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-
> > > > > ee-8-high-performance>
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 2018-03-06 11:11 GMT+01:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <
> > [hidden email]
> > > >:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> 2018-03-06 10:24 GMT+01:00 Jean-Louis Monteiro <
> > > > > [hidden email]>
> > > > > >> :
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>> Hi community,
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> So we now have something close in terms of MP-JWT
> implementation.
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> With the playground branch I've been working on (Thanks Romain
> > for
> > > > the
> > > > > >>> help), we now pass 100% of the TCK (including a missing part in
> > > > MP-JWT
> > > > > >>> TCK
> > > > > >>> I have eagerly added - see ticket on MP-JWT).
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> Now the question is how do we proceed?
> > > > > >>> Knowing that most of the code is not TomEE specific.
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> I'd move it to G to a new git repo keeping only the tck exec - a
> > bit
> > > > > like
> > > > > >> Roberto started with config. I'll be happy to help fixing the
> > small
> > > > > >> remaining enhancements to do (jwt parsing based on jsonb/p,
> config
> > > > etc).
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> Only few things are in the TomcatSecurityService but that can
> > > remain
> > > > in
> > > > > >>> TomEE because it's not really MP-JWT specific either.
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> +1, was overdue anyway for our servlet-ejb integration
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> Here is the PR for discussion
> > > > > >>> https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/123
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> Cheers
> > > > > >>> Jean-Louis
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> --
> > > > > >>> Jean-Louis Monteiro
> > > > > >>> http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
> > > > > >>> http://www.tomitribe.com
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: MP-JWT progress

Romain Manni-Bucau
quick heads up: if no objection in between I plan to start creating the
project tomorrow to let JL importing the code he did.


Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
<https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
<http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
<https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance>

2018-03-12 16:33 GMT+01:00 Rudy De Busscher <[hidden email]>:

> OK (non-binding of course :) for generic classes at Geronimo.
>
> On 12 March 2018 at 16:01, Jean-Louis Monteiro <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> > So what's the conclusion here?
> >
> > Should I request a git repo on geronimo and extract all generic classes
> > there along side with other implementations?
> > Or do you guys prefer another tomee repo with the MP-JWT impl?
> >
> > I don't mind if they go here and there, just need to know so I can move
> on
> > with the contribution.
> >
> > --
> > Jean-Louis Monteiro
> > http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
> > http://www.tomitribe.com
> >
> > On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 2:15 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> [hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > 2018-03-09 12:37 GMT+01:00 Jonathan Gallimore <
> > > [hidden email]>
> > > :
> > >
> > > > Currently this in a PR, so it hasn't actually been merged anywhere.
> > > There's
> > > > some at least some TomEE specific code, so some modules need defining
> > > > before it can be "moved" in my view.
> > > >
> > > > Rudy's point is good one - no doubt a generic, reusable module may
> well
> > > be
> > > > what we end up with. Wherever that lives when it has clearly been
> > > defined,
> > > > it needs documenting and showing how to use it.
> > > >
> > > > We talked previously about being able to have modules in separate
> repos
> > > > under TomEE. Is there some issue with doing that? What's the rush to
> > > shift
> > > > this off to Geronimo?
> > > >
> > >
> > > No rush, geronimo will have a jwt-auth impl and I was waiting JL push
> > what
> > > he did before speaking of creating a project @G. I would like to share
> > the
> > > same impl with tomee to avoid to x2 the effort. however if not desired
> it
> > > is fine as well.
> > >
> > > It is also important to keep in mind that on tomee side there is *no*
> > > specific code, only fixes in the propagation which also impact
> > webprofile,
> > > nothing linked to MP or this particular spec.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Jon
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 11:27 AM, Rudy De Busscher <
> > [hidden email]
> > > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I'm not saying we should move TomEE code into Geronimo.
> > > > >
> > > > > If we move the generic stuff for JWT Auth to Geronimo, it will not
> be
> > > > > enough to have it completely functional. And that should be made
> > clear
> > > > from
> > > > > the beginning for all potential usages.
> > > > >
> > > > > On 9 March 2018 at 12:20, John D. Ament <[hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > I don't think its a good idea to move TomEE code into Geronimo.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 5:50 AM Romain Manni-Bucau <
> > > > [hidden email]
> > > > > >
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > If there is no other comment, any objection to move it to
> > > > > > > geronimo-jwt-auth? (let say if not we do it on monday european
> > > time)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > > > > > @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
> > > > > > > <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
> > > > > > > <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github
> > > > > > > <https://github.com/rmannibucau> | LinkedIn
> > > > > > > <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
> > > > > > > <https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-
> > > > > > ee-8-high-performance>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > 2018-03-06 11:11 GMT+01:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <
> > > [hidden email]
> > > > >:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> 2018-03-06 10:24 GMT+01:00 Jean-Louis Monteiro <
> > > > > > [hidden email]>
> > > > > > >> :
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >>> Hi community,
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>> So we now have something close in terms of MP-JWT
> > implementation.
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>> With the playground branch I've been working on (Thanks
> Romain
> > > for
> > > > > the
> > > > > > >>> help), we now pass 100% of the TCK (including a missing part
> in
> > > > > MP-JWT
> > > > > > >>> TCK
> > > > > > >>> I have eagerly added - see ticket on MP-JWT).
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>> Now the question is how do we proceed?
> > > > > > >>> Knowing that most of the code is not TomEE specific.
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> I'd move it to G to a new git repo keeping only the tck exec
> - a
> > > bit
> > > > > > like
> > > > > > >> Roberto started with config. I'll be happy to help fixing the
> > > small
> > > > > > >> remaining enhancements to do (jwt parsing based on jsonb/p,
> > config
> > > > > etc).
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>> Only few things are in the TomcatSecurityService but that can
> > > > remain
> > > > > in
> > > > > > >>> TomEE because it's not really MP-JWT specific either.
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> +1, was overdue anyway for our servlet-ejb integration
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>> Here is the PR for discussion
> > > > > > >>> https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/123
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>> Cheers
> > > > > > >>> Jean-Louis
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>> --
> > > > > > >>> Jean-Louis Monteiro
> > > > > > >>> http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
> > > > > > >>> http://www.tomitribe.com
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: MP-JWT progress

Jean-Louis MONTEIRO
I can do it tomorrow morning romain

Le 18 mars 2018 18:31, "Romain Manni-Bucau" <[hidden email]> a
écrit :

> quick heads up: if no objection in between I plan to start creating the
> project tomorrow to let JL importing the code he did.
>
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
> <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <https://github.com/
> rmannibucau> |
> LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
> <https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-
> ee-8-high-performance>
>
> 2018-03-12 16:33 GMT+01:00 Rudy De Busscher <[hidden email]>:
>
> > OK (non-binding of course :) for generic classes at Geronimo.
> >
> > On 12 March 2018 at 16:01, Jean-Louis Monteiro <[hidden email]
> >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > So what's the conclusion here?
> > >
> > > Should I request a git repo on geronimo and extract all generic classes
> > > there along side with other implementations?
> > > Or do you guys prefer another tomee repo with the MP-JWT impl?
> > >
> > > I don't mind if they go here and there, just need to know so I can move
> > on
> > > with the contribution.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Jean-Louis Monteiro
> > > http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
> > > http://www.tomitribe.com
> > >
> > > On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 2:15 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> > [hidden email]>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > 2018-03-09 12:37 GMT+01:00 Jonathan Gallimore <
> > > > [hidden email]>
> > > > :
> > > >
> > > > > Currently this in a PR, so it hasn't actually been merged anywhere.
> > > > There's
> > > > > some at least some TomEE specific code, so some modules need
> defining
> > > > > before it can be "moved" in my view.
> > > > >
> > > > > Rudy's point is good one - no doubt a generic, reusable module may
> > well
> > > > be
> > > > > what we end up with. Wherever that lives when it has clearly been
> > > > defined,
> > > > > it needs documenting and showing how to use it.
> > > > >
> > > > > We talked previously about being able to have modules in separate
> > repos
> > > > > under TomEE. Is there some issue with doing that? What's the rush
> to
> > > > shift
> > > > > this off to Geronimo?
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > No rush, geronimo will have a jwt-auth impl and I was waiting JL push
> > > what
> > > > he did before speaking of creating a project @G. I would like to
> share
> > > the
> > > > same impl with tomee to avoid to x2 the effort. however if not
> desired
> > it
> > > > is fine as well.
> > > >
> > > > It is also important to keep in mind that on tomee side there is *no*
> > > > specific code, only fixes in the propagation which also impact
> > > webprofile,
> > > > nothing linked to MP or this particular spec.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Jon
> > > > >
> > > > > On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 11:27 AM, Rudy De Busscher <
> > > [hidden email]
> > > > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > I'm not saying we should move TomEE code into Geronimo.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If we move the generic stuff for JWT Auth to Geronimo, it will
> not
> > be
> > > > > > enough to have it completely functional. And that should be made
> > > clear
> > > > > from
> > > > > > the beginning for all potential usages.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 9 March 2018 at 12:20, John D. Ament <[hidden email]>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > I don't think its a good idea to move TomEE code into Geronimo.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 5:50 AM Romain Manni-Bucau <
> > > > > [hidden email]
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > If there is no other comment, any objection to move it to
> > > > > > > > geronimo-jwt-auth? (let say if not we do it on monday
> european
> > > > time)
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > > > > > > @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
> > > > > > > > <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
> > > > > > > > <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github
> > > > > > > > <https://github.com/rmannibucau> | LinkedIn
> > > > > > > > <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
> > > > > > > > <https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-
> > > > > > > ee-8-high-performance>
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > 2018-03-06 11:11 GMT+01:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <
> > > > [hidden email]
> > > > > >:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> 2018-03-06 10:24 GMT+01:00 Jean-Louis Monteiro <
> > > > > > > [hidden email]>
> > > > > > > >> :
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >>> Hi community,
> > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > >>> So we now have something close in terms of MP-JWT
> > > implementation.
> > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > >>> With the playground branch I've been working on (Thanks
> > Romain
> > > > for
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > >>> help), we now pass 100% of the TCK (including a missing
> part
> > in
> > > > > > MP-JWT
> > > > > > > >>> TCK
> > > > > > > >>> I have eagerly added - see ticket on MP-JWT).
> > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > >>> Now the question is how do we proceed?
> > > > > > > >>> Knowing that most of the code is not TomEE specific.
> > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> I'd move it to G to a new git repo keeping only the tck exec
> > - a
> > > > bit
> > > > > > > like
> > > > > > > >> Roberto started with config. I'll be happy to help fixing
> the
> > > > small
> > > > > > > >> remaining enhancements to do (jwt parsing based on jsonb/p,
> > > config
> > > > > > etc).
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > >>> Only few things are in the TomcatSecurityService but that
> can
> > > > > remain
> > > > > > in
> > > > > > > >>> TomEE because it's not really MP-JWT specific either.
> > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> +1, was overdue anyway for our servlet-ejb integration
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > >>> Here is the PR for discussion
> > > > > > > >>> https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/123
> > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > >>> Cheers
> > > > > > > >>> Jean-Louis
> > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > >>> --
> > > > > > > >>> Jean-Louis Monteiro
> > > > > > > >>> http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
> > > > > > > >>> http://www.tomitribe.com
> > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
   --
    Jean-Louis Monteiro
    http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
    http://www.tomitribe.com
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: MP-JWT progress

David Blevins-2
In reply to this post by John D. Ament-2
I'd lean towards the side of John Ament and Jon Gallimore.  Can we merge this at least?


-David

> On Mar 9, 2018, at 3:20 AM, John D. Ament <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> I don't think its a good idea to move TomEE code into Geronimo.
>
> On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 5:50 AM Romain Manni-Bucau <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
>> If there is no other comment, any objection to move it to
>> geronimo-jwt-auth? (let say if not we do it on monday european time)
>>
>>
>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
>> <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
>> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github
>> <https://github.com/rmannibucau> | LinkedIn
>> <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
>> <https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance>
>>
>> 2018-03-06 11:11 GMT+01:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <[hidden email]>:
>>
>>>
>>> 2018-03-06 10:24 GMT+01:00 Jean-Louis Monteiro <[hidden email]>
>>> :
>>>
>>>> Hi community,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> So we now have something close in terms of MP-JWT implementation.
>>>>
>>>> With the playground branch I've been working on (Thanks Romain for the
>>>> help), we now pass 100% of the TCK (including a missing part in MP-JWT
>>>> TCK
>>>> I have eagerly added - see ticket on MP-JWT).
>>>>
>>>> Now the question is how do we proceed?
>>>> Knowing that most of the code is not TomEE specific.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I'd move it to G to a new git repo keeping only the tck exec - a bit like
>>> Roberto started with config. I'll be happy to help fixing the small
>>> remaining enhancements to do (jwt parsing based on jsonb/p, config etc).
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Only few things are in the TomcatSecurityService but that can remain in
>>>> TomEE because it's not really MP-JWT specific either.
>>>>
>>>
>>> +1, was overdue anyway for our servlet-ejb integration
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Here is the PR for discussion
>>>> https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/123
>>>>
>>>> Cheers
>>>> Jean-Louis
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Jean-Louis Monteiro
>>>> http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
>>>> http://www.tomitribe.com
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: MP-JWT progress

Romain Manni-Bucau
@JL: ok I let you do

@David: hmm, not sure which part I missed but there is nothing to merge
except the TCK part which requires to extract it from the PR. This is what
JL will do tmr so we can merge it after.


Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
<https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
<http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
<https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance>

2018-03-18 20:26 GMT+01:00 David Blevins <[hidden email]>:

> I'd lean towards the side of John Ament and Jon Gallimore.  Can we merge
> this at least?
>
>
> -David
>
> > On Mar 9, 2018, at 3:20 AM, John D. Ament <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > I don't think its a good idea to move TomEE code into Geronimo.
> >
> > On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 5:50 AM Romain Manni-Bucau <[hidden email]
> >
> > wrote:
> >
> >> If there is no other comment, any objection to move it to
> >> geronimo-jwt-auth? (let say if not we do it on monday european time)
> >>
> >>
> >> Romain Manni-Bucau
> >> @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
> >> <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
> >> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github
> >> <https://github.com/rmannibucau> | LinkedIn
> >> <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
> >> <https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-
> ee-8-high-performance>
> >>
> >> 2018-03-06 11:11 GMT+01:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <[hidden email]>:
> >>
> >>>
> >>> 2018-03-06 10:24 GMT+01:00 Jean-Louis Monteiro <
> [hidden email]>
> >>> :
> >>>
> >>>> Hi community,
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> So we now have something close in terms of MP-JWT implementation.
> >>>>
> >>>> With the playground branch I've been working on (Thanks Romain for the
> >>>> help), we now pass 100% of the TCK (including a missing part in MP-JWT
> >>>> TCK
> >>>> I have eagerly added - see ticket on MP-JWT).
> >>>>
> >>>> Now the question is how do we proceed?
> >>>> Knowing that most of the code is not TomEE specific.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> I'd move it to G to a new git repo keeping only the tck exec - a bit
> like
> >>> Roberto started with config. I'll be happy to help fixing the small
> >>> remaining enhancements to do (jwt parsing based on jsonb/p, config
> etc).
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Only few things are in the TomcatSecurityService but that can remain
> in
> >>>> TomEE because it's not really MP-JWT specific either.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> +1, was overdue anyway for our servlet-ejb integration
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Here is the PR for discussion
> >>>> https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/123
> >>>>
> >>>> Cheers
> >>>> Jean-Louis
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>> Jean-Louis Monteiro
> >>>> http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
> >>>> http://www.tomitribe.com
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
>
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: MP-JWT progress

David Blevins-2
In reply to this post by David Blevins-2
In case that wasn't clear, gentle objection to moving this now.

If we can get this merged and at least a snapshot out, that'd be preferred.


--
David Blevins
http://twitter.com/dblevins
http://www.tomitribe.com

> On Mar 18, 2018, at 12:26 PM, David Blevins <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> I'd lean towards the side of John Ament and Jon Gallimore.  Can we merge this at least?
>
>
> -David
>
>> On Mar 9, 2018, at 3:20 AM, John D. Ament <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> I don't think its a good idea to move TomEE code into Geronimo.
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 5:50 AM Romain Manni-Bucau <[hidden email]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> If there is no other comment, any objection to move it to
>>> geronimo-jwt-auth? (let say if not we do it on monday european time)
>>>
>>>
>>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>>> @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
>>> <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
>>> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github
>>> <https://github.com/rmannibucau> | LinkedIn
>>> <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
>>> <https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance>
>>>
>>> 2018-03-06 11:11 GMT+01:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <[hidden email]>:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> 2018-03-06 10:24 GMT+01:00 Jean-Louis Monteiro <[hidden email]>
>>>> :
>>>>
>>>>> Hi community,
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> So we now have something close in terms of MP-JWT implementation.
>>>>>
>>>>> With the playground branch I've been working on (Thanks Romain for the
>>>>> help), we now pass 100% of the TCK (including a missing part in MP-JWT
>>>>> TCK
>>>>> I have eagerly added - see ticket on MP-JWT).
>>>>>
>>>>> Now the question is how do we proceed?
>>>>> Knowing that most of the code is not TomEE specific.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I'd move it to G to a new git repo keeping only the tck exec - a bit like
>>>> Roberto started with config. I'll be happy to help fixing the small
>>>> remaining enhancements to do (jwt parsing based on jsonb/p, config etc).
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Only few things are in the TomcatSecurityService but that can remain in
>>>>> TomEE because it's not really MP-JWT specific either.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> +1, was overdue anyway for our servlet-ejb integration
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Here is the PR for discussion
>>>>> https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/123
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers
>>>>> Jean-Louis
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Jean-Louis Monteiro
>>>>> http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
>>>>> http://www.tomitribe.com
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: MP-JWT progress

Romain Manni-Bucau
2018-03-18 20:38 GMT+01:00 David Blevins <[hidden email]>:

> In case that wasn't clear, gentle objection to moving this now.
>
> If we can get this merged and at least a snapshot out, that'd be preferred.
>

I'm not following the rational here. Let me try to summarize another time
for you to ensure we speak of the same thing:

1. code will be at geronimo - whatever happens at tomee
2. code we worked on with JL has no tomee dependency (see 4 to be complete
here)
3. as the MP-Config work Roberto did, we'll need a TCK module (next to the
Roberto's one) for jwt-auth spec + a modification of the MP distro
4. TomEE had some propagation bug we need to fix - MP or not since it
happens with a plain servlet

So the JWT-Auth PR for TomEE can be:

A. this one which means TomEE will have an implementation of JWT-Auth and
Geronimo another one
B. the JWT-Auth code moves to Geronimo and TomEE merges from this PR 3 and 4

Just to restate it since it seems we restart from a blank page ;): I'm -1
on A to avoid to split our effort and noise as ASF and +1 for B.


>
>
> --
> David Blevins
> http://twitter.com/dblevins
> http://www.tomitribe.com
>
> On Mar 18, 2018, at 12:26 PM, David Blevins <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> I'd lean towards the side of John Ament and Jon Gallimore.  Can we merge
> this at least?
>
>
> -David
>
> On Mar 9, 2018, at 3:20 AM, John D. Ament <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> I don't think its a good idea to move TomEE code into Geronimo.
>
> On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 5:50 AM Romain Manni-Bucau <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> If there is no other comment, any objection to move it to
> geronimo-jwt-auth? (let say if not we do it on monday european time)
>
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
> <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github
> <https://github.com/rmannibucau> | LinkedIn
> <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
> <https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-
> ee-8-high-performance>
>
> 2018-03-06 11:11 GMT+01:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <[hidden email]>:
>
>
> 2018-03-06 10:24 GMT+01:00 Jean-Louis Monteiro <[hidden email]>
> :
>
> Hi community,
>
>
> So we now have something close in terms of MP-JWT implementation.
>
> With the playground branch I've been working on (Thanks Romain for the
> help), we now pass 100% of the TCK (including a missing part in MP-JWT
> TCK
> I have eagerly added - see ticket on MP-JWT).
>
> Now the question is how do we proceed?
> Knowing that most of the code is not TomEE specific.
>
>
> I'd move it to G to a new git repo keeping only the tck exec - a bit like
> Roberto started with config. I'll be happy to help fixing the small
> remaining enhancements to do (jwt parsing based on jsonb/p, config etc).
>
>
>
> Only few things are in the TomcatSecurityService but that can remain in
> TomEE because it's not really MP-JWT specific either.
>
>
> +1, was overdue anyway for our servlet-ejb integration
>
>
>
> Here is the PR for discussion
> https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/123
>
> Cheers
> Jean-Louis
>
>
> --
> Jean-Louis Monteiro
> http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
> http://www.tomitribe.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: MP-JWT progress

David Blevins-2

> On Mar 18, 2018, at 12:43 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> 1. code will be at geronimo - whatever happens at tomee

As far as I understand the topic is still open and no git repos have been created anywhere yet, is that right?

Is there anyone on the Geronimo side who would be open to collaborating on a reusable JWT library under the TomEE project for a change?  Something not branded tomee or geronimo.


-David

123