Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Project structure: introduce token-spi module #1834

Closed
2 tasks done
Tracked by #1596
ndr-brt opened this issue Aug 16, 2022 · 2 comments · Fixed by #1867
Closed
2 tasks done
Tracked by #1596

Project structure: introduce token-spi module #1834

ndr-brt opened this issue Aug 16, 2022 · 2 comments · Fixed by #1867
Assignees
Labels
refactoring Cleaning up code and dependencies
Milestone

Comments

@ndr-brt
Copy link
Member

ndr-brt commented Aug 16, 2022

Feature Request

As reported in #1832 , common/token-generation-lib and common/token-validation-lib contain interfaces that are actually implemented by extensions, so probably they deserve to be put in an spi module.

This new token-spi module will contain:

  • JwtDecorator
  • JwtDecoratorRegistry
  • TokenValidationRule

As these 3 interfaces are being implemented by different modules

Which Areas Would Be Affected?

common, spi

Why Is the Feature Desired?

cleanup

Solution Proposal

Type of Issue

cleanup

Checklist

  • assigned appropriate label?
  • Do NOT select a milestone or an assignee!
@ndr-brt ndr-brt added the refactoring Cleaning up code and dependencies label Aug 16, 2022
@ndr-brt ndr-brt added this to the Milestone 6 milestone Aug 16, 2022
@ndr-brt ndr-brt self-assigned this Aug 16, 2022
@ndr-brt ndr-brt mentioned this issue Aug 16, 2022
18 tasks
@bscholtes1A
Copy link
Contributor

bscholtes1A commented Aug 16, 2022

maybe should be more generic than token-spi.

I would prefer to call it security-spi, containing a subfolder token-spi.

As detailed in #1357 there are some duplicated stuff between the token validation/generation libs and what some code in DID identity core (key wrappers,...)

Thus this would be a good opportunity to later put this common stuff into this security-spi module.

@ndr-brt
Copy link
Member Author

ndr-brt commented Aug 23, 2022

@bscholtes1A I'm on this but to me is not that clear which should be the right design to follow.
I will create a PR to accomplish this specific issue, better relate to the other for the refactoring you proposed.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
refactoring Cleaning up code and dependencies
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants