qpid-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Martin Ritchie (JIRA)" <qpid-...@incubator.apache.org>
Subject [jira] Updated: (QPID-2234) Clean up after addition of PrincipalHolder
Date Fri, 04 Dec 2009 11:06:20 GMT

     [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/QPID-2234?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]

Martin Ritchie updated QPID-2234:
---------------------------------

    Attachment: QPID-2234-Remove-getAuthorizedID.patch

> Clean up after addition of PrincipalHolder 
> -------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: QPID-2234
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/QPID-2234
>             Project: Qpid
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: Java Broker
>            Reporter: Martin Ritchie
>            Priority: Minor
>         Attachments: QPID-2234-Remove-getAuthorizedID.patch
>
>
> The addition of the PrincipalHolder and its getPrincipal() method has added new means
of retrieving the authorizedID for a session.
> However, AMQProtocolEngine still maintains getAuthorizedID() to pair with the setAuthorizedID(Principal)
> Do we need to have two getters for the same variable?
> Attached is a patch that removes getAuthorizedID as it is the least used. However, I
would be in favour of renaming getPrincipal to getAuthorizedPrincipal just to make things
clearer. I know the java doc says ' Principal that was used to authorized this session' ..
though I do have to wonder what session. 
> What was the reasoning behind the new PrincipalHolder? Seems odd just to have a single
getter in an interface.

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.


---------------------------------------------------------------------
Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation
Project:      http://qpid.apache.org
Use/Interact: mailto:dev-subscribe@qpid.apache.org


Mime
View raw message